Hear me out on this one.
So we know there are a lot of fucking retarded conspiracy theories out there, such as Time Cube, Transvestigation, and Flat Earth. These theories are so offputting because they start by claiming (not even theorizing a possibility, but actually claiming with absolute certainty) that some aspect of common sense is a lie, and then give nonsensical reasons for why it is being lied about (often with religious overtones about Satan himself spreading the lies).
But then there are plenty of conspiracy theories that, while they are still theories and haven't yet truly been proven, they absolutely do not belong in the same category as the off-the-walls nonsense I mentioned above. Theories like "Trump colluded with Russia to win the election", "The mainstream media works for the DNC", "X is responsible for 9/11", "X is responsible for the assassination of JFK", "Government elites are pedophiles" etc etc.
These ones, while they may or may not be true and don't always have a lot of convincing evidence on their side, at least make sense, and this is for four main reasons:
They have real-world motives for real-world people instead of fairy tales about angels and demons.
They contest the validity of second and third-hand information that was given to us, instead of contesting something that is part of common sense and can sometimes (such as Flat Earth) even be tested individually.
In order for the conspiracy to the true, you must assume the conspirators had to alter (almost) every document or piece of evidence in human history, while also being unable to silence the theorists.
Counterarguments are usually forced to attack the theorist's unwillingness to blindly accept the word of the alleged conspirators or second and third-hand sources, instead of attacking the theorist's scientific illiteracy.
They are fundamentally different types of theories, and the latter type has actually been proven before, such as the Gulf of Tonkin conspiracy.
But what bothers me is the fact that they are all put under a wide umbrella and described with the same term, 'conspiracy theory'.
Why is that? Why is something normal and plausible such as fuckery and lies in politics considered equal to shit like "Satan wants you to BELIEVE the Earth is round so you can't get into heaven!"?
If you ask me, it seems awfully suspicious that these people have gotten as much attention as they have. We all know the mainstream media can be really fickle with what they're willing to cover, and they tend to shy away from things outside of their viewer's comfort zones. Yet even the most sheltered normie knows of at least one batshit theory because he heard about it during a 15 minute Today Show segment. Has anyone considered the possibility that the media has intentionally been putting the real crazies in the spotlight so as to delegitimize conspiracy theories as a whole?
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the moon nazis have been building robots to act like flat Earthers and sending them here for that very purpose. Blah blah blah, powers that be, blah blah blah sheeple, etc etc.
Just a thought.
Sorry I'm late seeing this post, but I'm with you 100%.
Its long been suggested that US intelligence coined the the term "conspiracy theory" in the 60's. Others take it as far as to suggest that the term was invented for the sole purpose of giving a spin, which would cause the listener to instantly discredit anything related to the term. In my opinion, this sort of subliminal programming has been in overdrive in recent years/decades. Examples abound.
Take for example: "pro-life" and "pro-choice." Neither describes the issue! Each is a carefully constructed term designed to appeal to (and polarize) everyone who hears! Think about it for a moment. How many people out there are truly anti-life or anti-choice? Only the worst of the worst. We are all living, and we all believe in free will. It's truly a marvel of the programming in mass-media, that anyone could think those two things are somehow opposed, and yet a select few really buy into it. The problem is that media convinces so many that these few are actually a majority.
Anyway, back to your topic: If the CIA (or whoever) was truly at the ground level on creating a term like "conspiracy theory," its really not a stretch to think that they'd be playing games like "muh flat earth" almost 60 years later. And in much the same way, there are authentic believers out there.
I genuinely support the exploration of radical and new ideas, but its clear that many in that came are not authentic. A genuine, passionate person will always spread their version of truth with passion and positivity! Sometimes it comes to arguments, but authenticity never starts as an attack on someone.
I think we have ass seen those attacks by now. The popular podcaster Joe Rogan has long been attacked by flat-earth "believers," and the result has been Joe shunning the "conspiracy theorist community." Think of the damage that's done for the spread of knowledge!
So when I see two seemingly manufactured buzz words like "conspiracy theorists" and "flat-earther" working together to alienate a group, I can't help but think it's a coordinated effort.