Lazy article of drivel worthy of a top mind of reddit. The term "conspiracy theorist" is so widely abused these days (like racist, Nazi, communist, freedom, etc) that it has lost all meaning and consensus. It's still agreed to be a "dirty" and bad word, however, and getting labeled this instantly invalidates your argument in the minds of others. So tautologically it can be deployed to discredit dissent by those with power. No wonder when you use your own definition of conspiracy theorist, you can motte and baily and no true scotsmen the argument to prove your point. The author doesn't even address this obvious point, so any discussion that follows won't be beneficial.
As any conspiracy theorist will tell you, real conspiracies have and do occur, very rarely.
Author then proceeds to provide a list of ten items. Nonsense. The list of known conspiracies and abuses of government and businesses is a mile long.
I haven't personally vetted these lists, but the point stands.
Many of those are only known due to luck or a single whistleblower when the program involved thousands. Documents are destroyed, people are silenced and intimated, side deals get made in a conference room and the participants agree not to discuss it ever again, lawsuits are threatened but end in silent settlements with clauses not to discuss, etc. Any reasoned person would conclude given these circumstances and patterns of discovery, we only have visibility to the surface of the iceberg.
Making judgements when we know we're missing many true conspiracies and can't even agree on a definition of a conspiracy theorist is pretty pointless.
What conspiracy was revealed by a conspiracy “theorist”?
See original point. Yeah, the guy talking about how the alien spaceship that landed with bigfoot and had Elvis as a pilot isn't revealing any deep truth
Lazy article of drivel worthy of a top mind of reddit. The term "conspiracy theorist" is so widely abused these days (like racist, Nazi, communist, freedom, etc) that it has lost all meaning and consensus. It's still agreed to be a "dirty" and bad word, however, and getting labeled this instantly invalidates your argument in the minds of others. So tautologically it can be deployed to discredit dissent by those with power. No wonder when you use your own definition of conspiracy theorist, you can motte and baily and no true scotsmen the argument to prove your point. The author doesn't even address this obvious point, so any discussion that follows won't be beneficial.
> As any conspiracy theorist will tell you, real conspiracies have and do occur, very rarely.
Author then proceeds to provide a list of ten items. Nonsense. The list of _known_ conspiracies and abuses of government and businesses is a mile long.
https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/heres-100-confirmed-conspiracies-from-the-last-75-years/
https://wearechange.org/conspiracy-theory-mega-list/
I haven't personally vetted these lists, but the point stands.
Many of those are only known due to luck or a single whistleblower when the program involved thousands. Documents are destroyed, people are silenced and intimated, side deals get made in a conference room and the participants agree not to discuss it ever again, lawsuits are threatened but end in silent settlements with clauses not to discuss, etc. Any reasoned person would conclude given these circumstances and patterns of discovery, we only have visibility to the surface of the iceberg.
Making judgements when we know we're missing many true conspiracies and can't even agree on a definition of a conspiracy theorist is pretty pointless.
> What conspiracy was revealed by a conspiracy “theorist”?
See original point. Yeah, the guy talking about how the alien spaceship that landed with bigfoot and had Elvis as a pilot isn't revealing any deep truth
Lazy article of drivel worthy of a top mind of reddit. The term "conspiracy theorist" is so widely abused these days (like racist, Nazi, communist, freedom, etc) that it has lost all meaning and consensus. It's still agreed to be a "dirty" and bad word, however, and getting labeled this instantly invalidates your argument in the minds of others. So tautologically it can be deployed to discredit dissent by those with power. No wonder when you use your own definition of conspiracy theorist, you can motte and baily and no true scotsmen the argument to prove your point. The author doesn't even address this obvious point, so any discussion that follows won't be beneficial.
Author then proceeds to provide a list of ten items. Nonsense. The list of known conspiracies and abuses of government and businesses is a mile long.
https://www.investmentwatchblog.com/heres-100-confirmed-conspiracies-from-the-last-75-years/
https://wearechange.org/conspiracy-theory-mega-list/
I haven't personally vetted these lists, but the point stands.
Many of those are only known due to luck or a single whistleblower when the program involved thousands. Documents are destroyed, people are silenced and intimated, side deals get made in a conference room and the participants agree not to discuss it ever again, lawsuits are threatened but end in silent settlements with clauses not to discuss, etc. Any reasoned person would conclude given these circumstances and patterns of discovery, we only have visibility to the surface of the iceberg.
Making judgements when we know we're missing many true conspiracies and can't even agree on a definition of a conspiracy theorist is pretty pointless.
See original point. Yeah, the guy talking about how the alien spaceship that landed with bigfoot and had Elvis as a pilot isn't revealing any deep truth