They're out to get us!

[ZRT]

It's another form of imposing order on the world. Rather than accepting that things just -can- happen, people imbue the world with meaning by giving -everything- a purpose.

Furthermore, the truth really is stranger than fiction. Fiction is held to a higher standard than life because anybody reading a story will crucify any 'that wouldn't happen!' elements they can find, no matter how fantastical the source. (Unless it's outright fantastical comedy, like Doug Adams.)

Any given major event, there are a lot of things you can look at and say 'well, isn't that a convenient coincidence?' Try to write it as a story, it gets shredded as implausible, but in real life... it just happened that way.

I find conspiracy theories odious because it personalizes people's frustrations with life and gives them an excuse to act as if the whole world is putting on them. I hate the ambiguous 'they' that are keeping us all down. By and large, the 'keeping us down' is nothing personal, it's just standard social dynamics writ on a large scale. There's always an in crowd and an out crowd, and pecking orders in all social structures, haves and have nots. Society can engineer some of it out, but personalizing it past simple human avarice and lust for power and into deep, Machiavellian bullshit... please.

For example, convince me that the government that could successfully dupe everyone about a controlled demolition of the WTC couldn't turn around and produce a few measly containers of Sarin in Iraq? Either they're supercompetent plotters who can fool everyone, or they're bumbling boobs who can't hit the broad side of a barn, not both and not when either depiction just happens to suit the theory at hand. Conspiracy theory tends to run on this sort of cognitive dissonance, and it's intellectually offensive.

Sure, there are scams and schemes, but they're typically much shallower than all the fantastical plots people devise for the ambiguous 'they'. Bernie Madoff got away with his scam by simply offering the mirage of continual profit, combined with larcenous accounting. The fancy part was in the paperwork, not the scheme itself. Watergate was a dirty tricks group who botched a job. Iran-Contra was quite a bit more complex, but that had to do with the fact that there were a lot of players involved with various financial and political stakes, which also guaranteed that the operation would be compromised sooner or later.

 

[Keroin]

Sure, there are scams and schemes, but they're typically much shallower than all the fantastical plots people devise for the ambiguous 'they'.

This.

At a writer's convention I attended, one of the agents who was doing a seminar said, "Please, please, please don't send me 'conspiracy novels'. It is very hard to sell a conspiracy. Why? Because people can't keep secrets. The more people who know a secret, the less likely it is going to remain a secret."

Exactly.

 

[ZRT]

This.

At a writer's convention I attended, one of the agents who was doing a seminar said, "Please, please, please don't send me 'conspiracy novels'. It is very hard to sell a conspiracy. Why? Because people can't keep secrets. The more people who know a secret, the less likely it is going to remain a secret."

Exactly.

Somebody's gotta tell their girlfriend or husband or hair stylist or whatever. If you tell more than two people, assume the whole world will know about it inside of two hours.

 

[Keroin]

Somebody's gotta tell their girlfriend or husband or hair stylist or whatever. If you tell more than two people, assume the whole world will know about it inside of two hours.

Yup.

Conspiracy theories = 0
K = 1

 

[ZRT]

Yup.

Conspiracy theories = 0
K = 1

...and now everybody knows, because you had to share it with like five thousand of your closest friends.

So much for opsec.

 

[graceanne]

My first and continued reaction was that it was a joke site. It may even be a very serious, long lasting joke.

From what I understand, it's not. There are people who really, truly thing that the world is flat and the government is covering this up for some reason or the other.

 

[devoted lilgirl]

I find it interesting to take every day occurances and string from them some conspiracy theory...it never fails, someone will take me seriously, or begin to worry, because of my little made up story...I find them hilarious from afar, but the stupidity at the core is intensely dangerous...

 

[ZRT]

I find it interesting to take every day occurances and string from them some conspiracy theory...it never fails, someone will take me seriously, or begin to worry, because of my little made up story...I find them hilarious from afar, but the stupidity at the core is intensely dangerous...

Not stupidity, gullibility. People believe big lies because big lies are too fantastical to be delivered with a straight face, to the average subconscious.

And some might just be humoring you, too. I know that when people start on the conspiracy crap around me, I rarely argue it. I just nod, uh huh, and look for the exit. There's no talking to them, and I'm not interested in dealing with sufficiently flexible delusional behavior.

 

[YourCaptor]

Well... if never studied anything on this phenomenon, but here's some stuff the seems to be relevant.

One of the incredible things brains are exceptionally good at is filling in missing information. From basic stuff like filling in blind spots in your vision, to high functions such as heuristics, or assessing the likelihood of an event occurring. One of our human heuristic simply goes by how easy it is to imagine the scenario. We are more likely to think easily imagined scenarios as true, while hard to imagine scenarios aren't.

When people don't understand something they are likely to fall back on such a heuristic, which will produce errors.

False memories can also be created, by introducing plausible alternatives to the witnessed event. Then when the person recalls the memory it has been altered from what actually occurred to include the alternatives.

Fear of persecution is intrinsic to humans. Schizophrenics will often display delusions of persecution so frequently that it has its own category. We all also experience it here and their, blushing, embarrassment when someone overheard who shouldn't have, those people giggling behind you, whispering to each other, etc. It's probably an important mechanism to maintaining social relations.

Then we also have other social phenomena, like cults, or the bystander effect. People take cues from other people, and if they think this is true, then it must be true.

You also got the recency effect, that is people being more partial to what they last heard.


So you can see how the existence of conspiracy theories isn't far removed from human nature.

 

[Sweetdaisymae]

Yep I live with the King of conspitacy theorists, as far as he is concerned, Bill Gates is the antichrist, and the government are watching us all (my response, I'm sure that have better things to do than watch me wash my smalls)
He never takes surveys, uses store cards or reward points, coz THEY are watching.
Heck, let em watch, they will get bored pretty quickly!

 

[graceanne]

Heck, let em watch, they will get bored pretty quickly!

Exactly! That's what I tell my mom! Woo hoo, I bought milk. Again. Now I'm cleaning my house. Again. And doing my laundry. Again.

If I ever did anything interesting they wouldn't notice cause they're sleeping from the boredom of watching me.

 

[Cattypuss]

There's impartial and then there's irresponsible. I believe airing that movie was irresponsible, especially considering so many people believe anything they see on TV must be fact.

Not looking to hijack the thread, but this raises new questions in my mind - such as "Where do you draw the line between impartial and irresponsible?" and "Who should be the arbiter of whether something falls on the 'right' side of that line?".

 

[intothewoods]

Yep I live with the King of conspitacy theorists, as far as he is concerned, Bill Gates is the antichrist, and the government are watching us all (my response, I'm sure that have better things to do than watch me wash my smalls)
He never takes surveys, uses store cards or reward points, coz THEY are watching.
Heck, let em watch, they will get bored pretty quickly!

There's no organized conspiracy by the government, because the government as a whole is just not that competent. And in the U.S., we've set it up to be diffuse on purpose. On the other hand, there are real concerns about all of the information that is collected by companies. I don't think there is some evil plan at work, but if all of the information fell into the hands of one entity, that would be a scary thing. For example, when Telecom companies let the government have the access to spy on Americans. It's not like the gov't alone could orchestrate all that, but it's easy for them to lean on a company who has the technology in place.

Not looking to hijack the thread, but this raises new questions in my mind - such as "Where do you draw the line between impartial and irresponsible?" and "Who should be the arbiter of whether something falls on the 'right' side of that line?".

If a documentary or program is based on false information, I think it's irresponsible to air it. It's one thing to air something controversial. Go for it. But if it's not based on fact and presented as if it were, someone should have the good sense not to air it.

 

[Cattypuss]

If a documentary or program is based on false information, I think it's irresponsible to air it. It's one thing to air something controversial. Go for it. But if it's not based on fact and presented as if it were, someone should have the good sense not to air it.

So who decides if the information is false? (I don;t mean in this 9/11 instance, I mean in general for each item that gets - or doesn't get - aired)

 

[Keroin]

There's no organized conspiracy by the government, because the government as a whole is just not that competent. And in the U.S., we've set it up to be diffuse on purpose. On the other hand, there are real concerns about all of the information that is collected by companies. I don't think there is some evil plan at work, but if all of the information fell into the hands of one entity, that would be a scary thing. For example, when Telecom companies let the government have the access to spy on Americans. It's not like the gov't alone could orchestrate all that, but it's easy for them to lean on a company who has the technology in place.

Good point ITW. What irks me about grocery store cards is the nature of the system. If you want the savings, you must use the card. If you don’t want your information collected – for whatever reason – then you are financially penalized for that choice. It is a subtle form of bullying.

As Gracie mentioned, I’m really not doing anything worth watching either…oh look, she bought more chocolate, quel surprize…but that’s not the point. I have some major, philosophical issues with “Big Food”. I am lucky to have a co-op and another independent grocery store where I live but many people do not have this option.

 

[Keroin]

So who decides if the information is false? (I don;t mean in this 9/11 instance, I mean in general for each item that gets - or doesn't get - aired)

I’ll freely admit that I do not know what policies/laws/regulations govern what can and cannot be broadcast on TV but I’m sure there are measures in place to prevent someone from presenting a “documentary” about how the holocaust never happened, (as an example). This is why I was so shocked that Zeitgeist made it on air, as the claims in the movie are blatantly false and easily disproved with a minimal amount of fact checking, (and common sense).

That it was broadcast by our national television station makes it even more dangerous and grossly negligent because the CBC has an excellent reputation, especially when it comes to reporting.

Someone was asleep at the helm, I think.

 

[graceanne]

So who decides if the information is false? (I don;t mean in this 9/11 instance, I mean in general for each item that gets - or doesn't get - aired)

It's a good point. I'm a creationist, and so are a lot of other people. Does that mean that they can't make documentaries on the big bang, or (on the flip side) creationism?

This is a very rocky road to travel.

Good point ITW. What irks me about grocery store cards is the nature of the system. If you want the savings, you must use the card. If you don’t want your information collected – for whatever reason – then you are financially penalized for that choice. It is a subtle form of bullying.

I agree. But it doesn't annoy me enough to keep me from getting the store cards. LOL

 

[graceanne]

Okay, I gotta ask. What if we want them to get us?

 

[Keroin]

It's a good point. I'm a creationist, and so are a lot of other people. Does that mean that they can't make documentaries on the big bang, or (on the flip side) creationism?

This is a very rocky road to travel.

No, I don’t think it is a rocky road at all. I think public media has a responsibility to maintain standards. There are lots of “documentaries” about ghosts, UFOs, psychic powers and other things that are purely speculation and personal belief. These types of shows have a very minimal effect on the general public. When it comes to actual, real life events, with tangible facts, however, a higher level of authentication and screening should be employed.

Call me crazy, but I think that if you, as a filmmaker, are going to assert that your government plotted and carried out the murder of several thousand of its own citizens, on their own soil, then you’d better have some rock solid facts to back that up. And if you don’t I, as a television network, should carefully consider the ramifications of broadcasting your film to the public.

I agree. But it doesn't annoy me enough to keep me from getting the store cards. LOL

Don't get me wrong, I have them too - I'm not made of money. I just hate contributing to a system I disagree with.

 

[graceanne]

No, I don’t think it is a rocky road at all. I think public media has a responsibility to maintain standards. There are lots of “documentaries” about ghosts, UFOs, psychic powers and other things that are purely speculation and personal belief. These types of shows have a very minimal effect on the general public. When it comes to actual, real life events, with tangible facts, however, a higher level of authentication and screening should be employed.

Call me crazy, but I think that if you, as a filmmaker, are going to assert that your government plotted and carried out the murder of several thousand of its own citizens, on their own soil, then you’d better have some rock solid facts to back that up. And if you don’t I, as a television network, should carefully consider the ramifications of broadcasting your film to the public.

Actually, in this one show I agree. It's why I don't watch that stuff. My point is that, with a lot of different shows, the 'truth' line is kind of blurry, depending on who you ask about that truth.

Don't get me wrong, I have them too - I'm not made of money. I just hate contributing to a system I disagree with.

On that we can agree.

 

[ThorkelGriersen]

Good point ITW. What irks me about grocery store cards is the nature of the system. If you want the savings, you must use the card. If you don’t want your information collected – for whatever reason – then you are financially penalized for that choice. It is a subtle form of bullying.

As Gracie mentioned, I’m really not doing anything worth watching either…oh look, she bought more chocolate, quel surprize…but that’s not the point. I have some major, philosophical issues with “Big Food”. I am lucky to have a co-op and another independent grocery store where I live but many people do not have this option.

Luckily, I shop mostly at places that don't use the cards.

However, some of the tracking is a little unbelievable. I ordered several European DVDs from Amazon. That is "made in Europe" -- like Region 2 PAL -- that don't play on most American DVD players. They took forever -- a poor little army of ants that had to swim the Atlantic Ocean holding the DVDs over their little heads. Every couple of weeks Amazon sent messages with a delivery date, then canceling that date for an undetermined future date, and required that I check in and re-confirm that I still wanted the items.

In the course of this -- the items on the Welcome page were jumping around --I clicked on the damn Kindle. Now everywhere I go there is a Kindle ad. From my Yahoo mail, to the NYT, to Der Spiegel, to The Guardian, etc, etc. They have become my universal shadow.

Creepy!!!!

 

[MasterPhoenix]

http://www.southparkstudios.com/episodes/103775/

 

[intothewoods]

So who decides if the information is false? (I don;t mean in this 9/11 instance, I mean in general for each item that gets - or doesn't get - aired)

Someone has to select programming. Someone has to be making these decisions all the time. If something is completely out of left field, I don't see a problem in not airing it.

It's a good point. I'm a creationist, and so are a lot of other people. Does that mean that they can't make documentaries on the big bang, or (on the flip side) creationism?

This is a very rocky road to travel.



I agree. But it doesn't annoy me enough to keep me from getting the store cards. LOL

I don't think it's rocky at all. First of all, anyone can make a documentary about anything. There are programs on the history channel all the time about Jesus and all sorts of stories from the Bible and what historical evidence there exists for these stories.

Good point ITW. What irks me about grocery store cards is the nature of the system. If you want the savings, you must use the card. If you don’t want your information collected – for whatever reason – then you are financially penalized for that choice. It is a subtle form of bullying.

As Gracie mentioned, I’m really not doing anything worth watching either…oh look, she bought more chocolate, quel surprize…but that’s not the point. I have some major, philosophical issues with “Big Food”. I am lucky to have a co-op and another independent grocery store where I live but many people do not have this option.

I have a hard time seeing how it all connects in a way that's harmful, but companies do collect a whole lotta info.

 

[Homburg]

Don't get me wrong, I have them too - I'm not made of money. I just hate contributing to a system I disagree with.

If there was one bloody thing that I look at and wonder if there is negative intent behind it, it's Big Food.

I'd include Big Pharm as well, but there's no wondering. They're evil.

 

[Netzach]

I'm not paranoid about the store zipcode thing, more just freaking irritated at how much junk and spam you can attract without even trying. Why bother with nefariousness when they can just sell us all more shit?

And I hope, sincerely, that my phone calls have been fun for the NSA.