I’ll quibble with a few things here. The author posits that conspiracy theories are not on the rise because of declining belief in several well worn ones, like the JFK assassination or 9/11 being...
Exemplary
I’ll quibble with a few things here. The author posits that conspiracy theories are not on the rise because of declining belief in several well worn ones, like the JFK assassination or 9/11 being an inside job. I would argue that those aren’t necessarily declining because irrationally conspiratorial thinking is stagnant or on the decline, but because those specific theories are simply not that salient anymore and have been replaced by the ones that are on the rise that the author dismisses as notable exceptions (e.g. satanic pedo cults).
It can also be true that a phenomenon can be “on the rise” while still representing a not particularly significant proportion of the population. And the pure numerical standard of how many devoted adherents or practitioners are movement has aren’t necessarily the whole story in their influence, which is what people are generally talking about when they talk about “rise” and “fall” of broad societal tendencies.
There is also some stuff in there that the authors write off as a conspiracy that is arguably true. For example, the 2000 Presidential election arguably was stolen! You can argue about the legitimacy of the jurisprudence around Bush v Gore or to what extent the chicanery by the Republican Secretary of State might have tipped the scales and come out believing either way about it. But you’d be having a rational discussion, based on facts and standards of evidence and intelligible chains of logic to arrive at your conclusion one way or another. This is not the sort of irrational conspiracy theorizing people are talking about and it’s weird the author would equate these two.
Also them being more visible isn’t nothing. Intensity of belief, organization along lines of belief, and actions intended to impact the real world based on those organizations all impact whether a style of discourse or worldview is on “the rise” or not. Even if it’s a smaller share of the total population, if the intensity and organizational capacity is improving to the point where that smaller share can get people elected to Congress and foment and insurrection that is worth worrying about. This is because people care about how these things impact their actual lives and relationships with the people they’re close to. They don’t really care about the broader statistics around who falls into a group or not. It may be important to keep in mind that these are, objectively, small numbers of people. I think that is actually critical in keeping this sort of thing from having bad material outcomes in the real world to be able to ascertain what is a legitimate belief out there versus what is being amplified in bad faith. But it would be a mistake to dismiss something as a “mirage” just because only 20% of people are willing to go in for it. 20% is a lot of people, ISIS rarely had more than 20% of Iraqis supporting them and that was enough to keep that entire country into chaos.
I want to push back, probably with the same futilty as number six’s resistance to the rover in The Prisoner, to the categorical denial of voices raised against mainstream conclusions about big...
I want to push back, probably with the same futilty as number six’s resistance to the rover in The Prisoner, to the categorical denial of voices raised against mainstream conclusions about big events like jfk
Let me first remind everyone that the House of the U.S. Congress select committee on assassinations concluded jfk was killed as a result of a conspiracy-not by oswald.
And that the cia really did dose san franciscans with lsd. And that the us military really did develop and manufacture b-z, and really intense psychedelic drug, for use in warfare in vietnam.
There are many more examples of clearly unconstitutional and illegal clandestine activities from the us government.
And let’s not forget all the efforts, at best ignored by government, of large
Corporarations tk extract profits by whatever means they can, and hiding from consequences.
Conspiracies-secret actions by small groups for their internal benefit at public cost—are all atound us and at every scale. To not question official narratives, while easy and understandable for a busy parent, is nevertheless anathema to a free society. Not every strange event is a result of conspiracy, but we accept too easily in my view that what we see is what we are getting.
I’ll quibble with a few things here. The author posits that conspiracy theories are not on the rise because of declining belief in several well worn ones, like the JFK assassination or 9/11 being an inside job. I would argue that those aren’t necessarily declining because irrationally conspiratorial thinking is stagnant or on the decline, but because those specific theories are simply not that salient anymore and have been replaced by the ones that are on the rise that the author dismisses as notable exceptions (e.g. satanic pedo cults).
It can also be true that a phenomenon can be “on the rise” while still representing a not particularly significant proportion of the population. And the pure numerical standard of how many devoted adherents or practitioners are movement has aren’t necessarily the whole story in their influence, which is what people are generally talking about when they talk about “rise” and “fall” of broad societal tendencies.
There is also some stuff in there that the authors write off as a conspiracy that is arguably true. For example, the 2000 Presidential election arguably was stolen! You can argue about the legitimacy of the jurisprudence around Bush v Gore or to what extent the chicanery by the Republican Secretary of State might have tipped the scales and come out believing either way about it. But you’d be having a rational discussion, based on facts and standards of evidence and intelligible chains of logic to arrive at your conclusion one way or another. This is not the sort of irrational conspiracy theorizing people are talking about and it’s weird the author would equate these two.
Also them being more visible isn’t nothing. Intensity of belief, organization along lines of belief, and actions intended to impact the real world based on those organizations all impact whether a style of discourse or worldview is on “the rise” or not. Even if it’s a smaller share of the total population, if the intensity and organizational capacity is improving to the point where that smaller share can get people elected to Congress and foment and insurrection that is worth worrying about. This is because people care about how these things impact their actual lives and relationships with the people they’re close to. They don’t really care about the broader statistics around who falls into a group or not. It may be important to keep in mind that these are, objectively, small numbers of people. I think that is actually critical in keeping this sort of thing from having bad material outcomes in the real world to be able to ascertain what is a legitimate belief out there versus what is being amplified in bad faith. But it would be a mistake to dismiss something as a “mirage” just because only 20% of people are willing to go in for it. 20% is a lot of people, ISIS rarely had more than 20% of Iraqis supporting them and that was enough to keep that entire country into chaos.
I want to push back, probably with the same futilty as number six’s resistance to the rover in The Prisoner, to the categorical denial of voices raised against mainstream conclusions about big events like jfk
Let me first remind everyone that the House of the U.S. Congress select committee on assassinations concluded jfk was killed as a result of a conspiracy-not by oswald.
And that the cia really did dose san franciscans with lsd. And that the us military really did develop and manufacture b-z, and really intense psychedelic drug, for use in warfare in vietnam.
There are many more examples of clearly unconstitutional and illegal clandestine activities from the us government.
And let’s not forget all the efforts, at best ignored by government, of large
Corporarations tk extract profits by whatever means they can, and hiding from consequences.
Conspiracies-secret actions by small groups for their internal benefit at public cost—are all atound us and at every scale. To not question official narratives, while easy and understandable for a busy parent, is nevertheless anathema to a free society. Not every strange event is a result of conspiracy, but we accept too easily in my view that what we see is what we are getting.