Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:00 AM Mar 2014

In an online context, "conspiracy lust" is a lot like blood lust.

I think there is an inate desire amongst many people--particularly in this 21st Century on an online setting--to either think there has to be more to a story than what there already is, or want to see a story become more than there actually is. And when it comes to the sanctuary of the keyboard, there's no limit.

People blood lust--unconsciously, even--when they want to see death, destruction and chaos abound in a situation to which they are not intimately connected. Because, face it, death, destruction and chaos are exciting from afar. It's why we have action stories and disaster movies. It makes intriguing television and fascinating news following. And when you don't have to experience it first hand, especially in our online society today, the sky's the limit for what you think should happen in a potential powder keg of a situation.

Likewise, I believe people also engage in "conspiracy lust." In main part because I believe people get bored of official stories. They get bored with the idea of what you see is what you get, and they wish that they were the secret gatekeepers of the knowledge of what really happened. And as is the case with blood lust, most of this conspiracy lust happens from afar, without an actual intimate connection to the events around the conspiracy lusters. Instead of that organic, real life tie to the situation, artificial ties are created by various people claiming to be authorities on the subject, so firsthand knowledge then becomes second hand knowledge, third hand knowledge, etc. And chances are, the more far fetched a conspiracy theory sounds, the more dubious and removed the authority actually is.

To be fair to all conspiracy theories, I will say they all begin with a core kernel of truth. For example, I am convinced that as it relates to the September 11th attacks, the Bush administration was--for whatever reason--not forthcoming as to all intelligence it had firsthand in the leadup to the attacks. And I also believe there were some in the Bush administration who really did see a silver lining in the attacks to further their own agenda or policy. The problem becomes, however, that from these kernels of truth, conspiracy lusters take huge logical leaps in creating an actual theory that ultimately disservice the legitimate underlying questions. So in their minds, those rational questions about September 11th suddenly becomes proof positive that a missile hit the Pentagon or that the World Trade Center was brought down by a controlled demolition, or some other inane claptrap of the sort. This type of springboarding into the rhetorical abyss cannot be healthy behavior.

And the biggest problem for conspiracy lusters is the uninhibited willingness to dumpster dive into a pile of bullshit authorities in the vain effort to prove that their theory is in fact the true story of events. So when you feel perfectly willing to quote Paul Craig Roberts on a story when you know on any other subject you wouldn't be touching him with a 10 foot pole, you need to take a long hard look at yourself and decide whether it is worth to continue pushing your theory.

Why am I bringing this up now? Given the events over the past couple of weeks in Ukraine, it appears to become quite popular here to claim that what happened in Ukraine was a CIA sponsored coup, or that the country now lies in the grips of neo-Nazi/ultranationalist control. Many posts of that sort have been posted here, and even more have felt it okay to click the Rec button on such posts. And like all good conspiracy theories, there are underlying truths, truths that may indeed be inconvenient to many, even myself. Yes, the United States in the past has engaged in covert attempts to foment regime change in places like Iran or Chile and the like. Yes, included in the vast protest movement were some ultranationalists and even some neo-Nazis. And yes, as is common in any type of parliamentary legislative system, some legislators in far-right parties did receive cabinet posts in the interim (note: interim) government. But beyond what we do know, I've seen DUers climb all over themselves to insist these isolated facts are proof-positive of a much larger scheme, and they are mortgaging their credibility in the process. And in doing so from the comforts of their keyboards, they are doing a huge disservice to the people on the ground who have seen the truth with their very own eyes.

58 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
In an online context, "conspiracy lust" is a lot like blood lust. (Original Post) Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 OP
"...they wish that they were the secret gatekeepers of the knowledge..." randome Mar 2014 #1
In the case of the Ukraine BainsBane Mar 2014 #2
When you want to push a good conspiracy theory, you will cite just about anything... Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #4
Do you think they really look back? BainsBane Mar 2014 #5
Really? So you don't think or read about ANY event until you are CERTAIN all the facts are in? WinkyDink Mar 2014 #16
Excuse me? BainsBane Mar 2014 #43
Pseudo-intellectuals seem to believe in every conspiracy theory put in front of them. PhilSays Mar 2014 #3
And Iran-Contra never happened, nor "Watergate," nor Tonkin Gulf, nor Caesar's stabbing. WinkyDink Mar 2014 #18
Still doesn't justify the lunacy of truthers and other assorted nutjobs. PhilSays Mar 2014 #44
Two Points, Sir The Magistrate Mar 2014 #6
+1. And it can pay quite well too. nt bemildred Mar 2014 #8
You have, quite nicely, ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #37
What "Consipiracy theorists" was too weak a term of opprobrium? Fumesucker Mar 2014 #7
I use the term because I think it is a pathological condition for many. nt Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #11
So is naivete. WinkyDink Mar 2014 #19
And DELIBERATE naivete. Pholus Mar 2014 #35
I think we can see who is pathological around here Fumesucker Mar 2014 #42
When people insist everything is a conspiracy, it is a problem. nt Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #45
And when people insist conspiracies never happen, that is also a problem.. Fumesucker Mar 2014 #46
The problem with conspiracy theories is that they lack actual *theory.* OnyxCollie Mar 2014 #9
Start with "a new Pearl Harbor." WinkyDink Mar 2014 #20
I'm going before that. OnyxCollie Mar 2014 #54
Interesting. Corporations, hmmm? Fascism: It's not just for Europe anymore. WinkyDink Mar 2014 #56
Lots of similarities between the internment and domestic surveillance. OnyxCollie Mar 2014 #57
Where are battles won? Not the playing fields of Eton; rather, the suites of Wall Street. WinkyDink Mar 2014 #58
Perhaps if the government was more forthcoming and less addicted to secrecy, bemildred Mar 2014 #10
of course, that increased transparency would be a mere smokescreen geek tragedy Mar 2014 #25
Speculation is fun, isn't it? nt bemildred Mar 2014 #29
which may be part of the appeal. nt geek tragedy Mar 2014 #31
Indeed. And it removes the uncertainty of not knowing what is going on. bemildred Mar 2014 #34
LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #38
Name a more transparent nation than the US treestar Mar 2014 #49
"We can do better." nt bemildred Mar 2014 #50
I thought your post treestar Mar 2014 #53
I'm not getting into a discussion about which nations are better than others. bemildred Mar 2014 #55
There are different types of conspiracy theories. CJCRANE Mar 2014 #12
Perhaps if our govt. and media was not a bunch of liars 2pooped2pop Mar 2014 #13
Questioning an official story is one thing. Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #14
Some conspiracy theories are disinformation CJCRANE Mar 2014 #17
Here's your problem: If ANY "conspiracy theory" uncovered truth that the govt doesn't want you to WinkyDink Mar 2014 #24
Exactly, it's called "muddying the waters". CJCRANE Mar 2014 #28
If you don't tell people the truth, they will speculate and invent conspiracies. bemildred Mar 2014 #32
"People on the ground" often have an obstructed view. WinkyDink Mar 2014 #15
But where the espoused theory flies flat in the face of actual perception.... Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #22
WTC-7 wasn't hit by a plane, and no-one saw any do so. The S.H. claim is accepted nuttiness*. As for WinkyDink Mar 2014 #26
Broadly speaking Ukrainians are suffering mainly from ignorance dipsydoodle Mar 2014 #21
Somehow, I feel as if they are in a far, far better position to comment than you are. nt Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #23
Not if they are denied facts. dipsydoodle Mar 2014 #27
Except for those who see the facts with their own two eyes. Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #30
Eyewitnesses can be wrong, can be fooled, can see what they want to perceive, and can lie. NOT WinkyDink Mar 2014 #33
Own two eyes ? dipsydoodle Mar 2014 #36
You're providing interesting facts, but not supporting an overall theory. Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #40
Funny how ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2014 #39
The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter MicaelS Mar 2014 #41
You are convinced you know better 1000words Mar 2014 #47
I know not to make reckless assumptions based on scant evidence. Tommy_Carcetti Mar 2014 #48
True shenmue Mar 2014 #51
Remember: Bad people NEVER make plans! FiveGoodMen Mar 2014 #52
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
1. "...they wish that they were the secret gatekeepers of the knowledge..."
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:08 AM
Mar 2014

People who think their own lives are uninteresting tend to look for something to 'liven things up'. IMO.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

BainsBane

(53,012 posts)
2. In the case of the Ukraine
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:12 AM
Mar 2014

They are reciting Russian propaganda. I think that's different from the classic conspiracy theory, like we now see floating around about the Boston bombings.

As a staunch member of the evidence-based community, I loathe conspiracy theories.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
4. When you want to push a good conspiracy theory, you will cite just about anything...
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:15 AM
Mar 2014

...to prove your "point."

And then like a drunken bender, you will look back on it and wonder what on earth you were thinking.

 

PhilSays

(55 posts)
3. Pseudo-intellectuals seem to believe in every conspiracy theory put in front of them.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:15 AM
Mar 2014

In their quest to be less naive than everyone else, they blindly accept everything they consider non-mainstream.

The Magistrate

(95,241 posts)
6. Two Points, Sir
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:22 AM
Mar 2014

One, adherence to 'conspiracy theories' tracks well with a a sense of powerlessness, both personal and political. The first element of the thing is not too dangerous, as persons who perceive themselves as powerless personally generally are, while the second, if widespread enough in a polity, can prove dangerous indeed, as feeling unable to effect the actions of one's government or functions of one's society can lead to apathetic withdrawl, or angry and violent engagement, often without much clear sense of what actually is wrong, or how it can be fixed.

Second, adherence to 'conspiracy theories' provides two particular spiritual balms. Such theories provide a sense of certainty and understanding, both hard to come by in this modern world, and such theories provide a sense of being on the 'inside', of knowing more and understanding more, in short, a sense of being superior, to the mass of other people who just cannot see, and do not 'get it'. These feelings are very comforting, and especially so for people who actually do feel powerless and isolated and left behind.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
37. You have, quite nicely, ...
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:28 PM
Mar 2014

summed up DU, of late.

Pick any of the GD Hot Topics and one will find both of your points exposed ... "angry and violent engagement, often without much clear sense of what actually is wrong, or how it can be fixed" with "a sense of certainty and understanding ..., (that is) provid(ing) a sense of being on the 'inside', of knowing more and understanding more, in short, a sense of being superior, to the mass of other people who just cannot see, and do not 'get it'."

But what gets me about this is the apparent lack of ironic sense, where every Hot Topic is based on a media report ... from the same media that is deeply distrusted ... on every topic, except the topic at hand.

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
7. What "Consipiracy theorists" was too weak a term of opprobrium?
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:26 AM
Mar 2014

Dial the sneering at those who disagree with you back to eleventy how about it?

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
42. I think we can see who is pathological around here
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 01:49 PM
Mar 2014

That would be the one talking about the "lust" of others.

 

OnyxCollie

(9,958 posts)
9. The problem with conspiracy theories is that they lack actual *theory.*
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:42 AM
Mar 2014

They also start at the incident and work backwards, bringing in lots of non-rational elements to tie things together.

That said, I am currently working on a project to develop a "theory of conspiracy," whereby events like the Iraq war will be analyzed using peer-reviewed political theory and primary documents to determine if they are, in fact, conspiracies.

What will differ, however, will be that I will start with general political theory and then move to more specific theories, finally providing evidence that will either support or discount the hypotheses.

 

OnyxCollie

(9,958 posts)
54. I'm going before that.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 05:17 PM
Mar 2014

Like Wolfowitz's 1992 memo to invade Iraq, unilaterally if necessary.

Regarding PNAC, their Statement of Principles, which encouraged the US to increase defense spending to 4% of GDP, is even more appropriate for my analysis than Rebuilding America's Defenses.

The "new Pearl Harbor" bit is often misapplied. Having done my thesis on the Japanese internment, I discovered that the military necessity hypothesis was not supported. It was economic factors, i.e., farm corporations, having pushed for legislation to exploit Asians for over fifty years, that profited greatly when the Japanese were removed from their farms. Having put liens on Japanese farms, farm corporations were concerned that they would not get their money back. So they went to the government and said, "Hey, we see you've got a war going on, and you will be in a bit of a pickle if all these crops rot in the fields. Why don't you subsidize some dummy corporations to harvest the crops (so we aren't exposed to risk), that will sell the crops to us (for cheap), so that we can turn around and sell them for a big profit?"

The other two hypotheses, racial antipathy and revenge, appealed to non-rational authority in the mass public (who don't understand things) to permit this to happen.

 

OnyxCollie

(9,958 posts)
57. Lots of similarities between the internment and domestic surveillance.
Thu Mar 13, 2014, 08:42 PM
Mar 2014

Choosing the whole population instead of a specific few. Refusing to get a court warrant.

As for the economic factor, I suspect will hear more about corporate espionage by the NSA.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
10. Perhaps if the government was more forthcoming and less addicted to secrecy,
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 10:43 AM
Mar 2014

you know, the transparency thing, the situation would improve. Nations that are well governed according to the wishes of their citizens tend to have less of this sort of distrust to deal with.

Edit: And are stronger and more secure for that support.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
25. of course, that increased transparency would be a mere smokescreen
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:01 PM
Mar 2014

to conceal their real agenda.

See, e.g., the reaction to Barack Obama releasing his Certificate of Live Birth.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
34. Indeed. And it removes the uncertainty of not knowing what is going on.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:08 PM
Mar 2014

If one must lie in public, it is essential to be convincing.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
38. LOL ...
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:32 PM
Mar 2014

That is spot on.

But you could have provided a courtesy Put Down Your Coffee Before Reading This Post warning!

treestar

(82,383 posts)
53. I thought your post
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 05:14 PM
Mar 2014
Nations that are well governed according to the wishes of their citizens tend to have less of this sort of distrust to deal with.


Implied there are more transparent nations out there - which ones are they?

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
55. I'm not getting into a discussion about which nations are better than others.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 05:18 PM
Mar 2014

That is just a red herring as far as I am concerned. There are such, but there will something wrong with them which makes them not apropos, and then off we go ...

When my own nation gets it's shit together, which is certainly not the case now, I will be happy to consider what other peoples ought to do.

Edit: and that is my business.

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
12. There are different types of conspiracy theories.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:28 AM
Mar 2014

There are the more spontaneous ones, of the type we saw during the Bush era, where individuals try to fill in the gaps caaused by incomplete information.

Then there is propaganda of the type we see emanating from Glenn Beck and Fox News where partisans are spoonfed negative ideas about their opposition which they lap up enthusiastically with no need to do any critical thinking of their own.

 

2pooped2pop

(5,420 posts)
13. Perhaps if our govt. and media was not a bunch of liars
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:40 AM
Mar 2014

we would just believe the bullshit that spews from their mouths. I admit. I don't believe a mother fucking thing any of them say and I always think there is more to almost every story than what we are told.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
14. Questioning an official story is one thing.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:43 AM
Mar 2014

Creating an entire alternative narrative based on any loose straws to which one may grasp is an entirely different thing altogether.

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
17. Some conspiracy theories are disinformation
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:49 AM
Mar 2014

like the ones Glenn Beck spews.

Others are a way of making money off the gullible like Alex Jones.

Still others are people who *do* want to find the right answer but don't have the tools or abilities to find the right information and analyze it effectively.

So the number of conspiracy theories that are well thought out is going to be relatively small.

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
24. Here's your problem: If ANY "conspiracy theory" uncovered truth that the govt doesn't want you to
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:59 AM
Mar 2014

know, said conspiracy theory will NEVER be considered "well thought out," especially not by you or the other nay-sayers herein.

It will remain "unfounded," "disinformation," just proffered to "make money."

IOW: Your ilk won't believe anything other than the Official Story. Yet you consider others the dopes.

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
28. Exactly, it's called "muddying the waters".
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:04 PM
Mar 2014

All the Glenn Beck and Alex Jones type snake oil sellers swamp out the more well thought conspiracy theories.

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
32. If you don't tell people the truth, they will speculate and invent conspiracies.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:06 PM
Mar 2014

Even if you do, some will anyway, but fewer. Done well, a lot fewer.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
22. But where the espoused theory flies flat in the face of actual perception....
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:57 AM
Mar 2014

....it is incredibly insulting.

It is insulting to anyone who saw airplanes hit the World Trade Center that it was all just a US government controlled demolition.

It is insulting to the parent of a Sandy Hook elementary victim that the shooting was all an elaborate hoax.

And yes, it is insulting to the Ukrainian who never saw a penny from the CIA nor held any type of admiration for neo-Nazi ideology, who decided to go on down to the Maidan because he or she was upset at obvious instances of government corruption, to suggest that he or she is a stooge of the CIA or of neo-cons or neo-Nazis.

Get my drift?

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
26. WTC-7 wasn't hit by a plane, and no-one saw any do so. The S.H. claim is accepted nuttiness*. As for
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:02 PM
Mar 2014

the CIA and Ukraine, the CIA isn't so obvious.

*Never promoted on DU, I'm willing to bet.

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
21. Broadly speaking Ukrainians are suffering mainly from ignorance
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 11:55 AM
Mar 2014

with regard their own economic circumstance as opposed to being subject to a CIA sponsored coup or that the country now lies in the grips of neo-Nazi/ultranationalist control which are possible associated items.

This will come home to roost when they wish they were as fortunate as Greece.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
30. Except for those who see the facts with their own two eyes.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:04 PM
Mar 2014

As opposed to those who see "facts" in random online articles written by random online authors, and then cited as "sources" to confirm one's own personal theory.

 

WinkyDink

(51,311 posts)
33. Eyewitnesses can be wrong, can be fooled, can see what they want to perceive, and can lie. NOT
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:06 PM
Mar 2014

saying anything about whoever it is you are choosing to find credible; just saying in general.

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
36. Own two eyes ?
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:11 PM
Mar 2014

Its a matter of record what the terms of IMF loans were on which Ukraine defaulted 2008 and 2010. Its already clear the EU et al will require the same terms - namely reduced government spending i.e. mainly pensions and cessation of supply of gas to consumers at below cost and devalued currency. Aside from that loans will secured against state assets because that is the way its done now aka English law not own law.

Chances are that most of their population are not aware - they have yet to see the outcomes.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
40. You're providing interesting facts, but not supporting an overall theory.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:43 PM
Mar 2014

That being that the change in power in Ukraine was not a result of an organic, homegrown populist movement by the Ukrainian people but in fact a western-sponsored coup.

Saying that the EU might have an interest in a stable and friendly Ukraine is not false, but to say that fact supports the narrative that it was a Western coup is a Grand Canyon jump to conclusions.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
39. Funny how ...
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:39 PM
Mar 2014

many objecting to/arguing against the specific example in the OP are proving the OP.

BTW ... Great OP!

MicaelS

(8,747 posts)
41. The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 12:59 PM
Mar 2014

I think that classic essay explains American thought better than any other. It may have been written 50 years ago, but it is still relevant today. And today it applies equally to the Left as well as the Right.

http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/

The paranoid spokesman sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms—he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization. He constantly lives at a turning point.

One of the impressive things about paranoid literature is the contrast between its fantasied conclusions and the almost touching concern with factuality it invariably shows. It produces heroic strivings for evidence to prove that the unbelievable is the only thing that can be believed. Of course, there are highbrow, lowbrow, and middlebrow paranoids, as there are likely to be in any political tendency. But respectable paranoid literature not only starts from certain moral commitments that can indeed be justified but also carefully and all but obsessively accumulates “evidence.” The difference between this “evidence” and that commonly employed by others is that it seems less a means of entering into normal political controversy than a means of warding off the profane intrusion of the secular political world. The paranoid seems to have little expectation of actually convincing a hostile world, but he can accumulate evidence in order to protect his cherished convictions from it.

In American experience ethnic and religious conflict have plainly been a major focus for militant and suspicious minds of this sort, but class conflicts also can mobilize such energies.

The situation becomes worse when the representatives of a particular social interest—perhaps because of the very unrealistic and unrealizable nature of its demands—are shut out of the political process. Having no access to political bargaining or the making of decisions, they find their original conception that the world of power is sinister and malicious fully confirmed. They see only the consequences of power—and this through distorting lenses—and have no chance to observe its actual machinery. A distinguished historian has said that one of the most valuable things about history is that it teaches us how things do not happen. It is precisely this kind of awareness that the paranoid fails to develop. He has a special resistance of his own, of course, to developing such awareness, but circumstances often deprive him of exposure to events that might enlighten him—and in any case he resists enlightenment.
 

1000words

(7,051 posts)
47. You are convinced you know better
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 02:26 PM
Mar 2014

A sure sign to take your perspective with a grain of salt.

Conspiracy? Nope. Critical thinking.

Tommy_Carcetti

(43,153 posts)
48. I know not to make reckless assumptions based on scant evidence.
Wed Mar 12, 2014, 03:01 PM
Mar 2014

The fact is, despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth, there hasn't been any hard evidence presented from a legitimate source that labels what happened in Ukraine as a western sponsored coup.

Just a lot of rank speculation to that effect.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In an online context, &qu...