Speculation on the psychology of conspiracy theorists

[maccy]

Hello all,

I've become somewhat addicted to this thread as lurker and this is my 1st proper post (I did post once on the crazy concrete core thread, the less said the better on that).

Anyway, I was looking at the Official Loose Change Blog (loosechange911.blogspot.com) and I noticed that they had an entry for a poster "describing" the Military Comissions Act (i32.photobucket.com/albums/d13/entropy_337/newbill-hires.jpg).

What got me thinking was the first few words on the Handbill:

THINK YOU'RE FREE?? THINK AGAIN!
Congress just passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006

Now in any political movement I've ever been involved in, we've tended to campaign against legislation before it's been passed - in order to try and stop it or get it changed. This flyer almost reads like a celeration of the power of the act and the new terrible powers of the US Government.

This (combined with talk of fascists in office and suchlike) got me thinking that maybe a lot of CTists just want to feel oppressed. The various conspiracy theories are so fudamentally unlikely that I'm tempted to speculate that function as a way of safely avoiding reality, having an excuse for not doing anything with your life and feeling like a heroic rebel fighting the system (a Luke Skywalker or a Robin Hood perhaps?).

There's no attempt to fight any of the measures that have been taken since 9/11, or to influence the foreign policy direction of the administration. No campaigning or activism around these areas. There's just vague talk of further enquiry without even the effort to say how this enquiry might take place and certainly no concerted and coherent campaign for an enquiry. And if they really believe that the US is effectively a dictatorship, then they must also believe that they'll never get this magic enquiry.

Given that they are free to say what they want and to hand out their DVDs and flyers at Ground Zero, there is essentially no risk at all to what they do, no matter how much they feel like rebels.

It seems to me they can disgregard the whole of normal politics by focussing on solving the "Truth of 9/11" as the only thing worth doing, by saying that all other activism is useless.

Perhaps this explains why so few CTists can engage in any kind of rational debate - they just repeat a mantra of "anomalies" to maintain their feelings of specialness, separation, rebellion and persecution.

Hopefully, in most cases this is a product of teenage rebelliousness (sometime prolonged in to the 20s) and the movement will dwindle as its members age, leaving the genuinely delusional.

This is all just speculation, however, and I hope I haven't unduly offended anyone.

Any thoughts?

Matthew

[Anti-sophist]

Have you ever looked into or read things from science or mathematical kooks? Try newsgroups like sci.physics or sci.math. I think having some experience with them, it gives a special insight to the two sides of the same coin.

A large part of it, I think, has to do with incredible egotism that -they- are central figures in history. They are on top of a great and historic moment.. in the future they will be regarded as persecuted heros like Copernicus and Galileo. That's why their see oppression everywhere they look.

It's like they view human history as a movie, and they refuse to believe that they are't main players in the plot. They are crucial to the story of humanity. This is why their quest is so important to them.

[Augustine]

Excellent post. I was reminded of a paper I read on "fantasy ideology" and people engaged in such fantasy. In essence, all other people are "props" to the fantasy - precisely why rational discourse is impossible. If you disagree, or challenge their viewpoint, you must be a "shill" or a "sheeple"; the option does not exist that you are an educated individual who has analyzed the evidence and arrived at a separate conclusion. All evidence may be arbitrarily dismissed or chosen solely based on the whim and desire of the fantasist; evidence which supports the fantasy is clung to, and evidence which would expose it is dismissed, not necessarily for any rational reason. (Possibly why it is so hard to pin down any truther, and why they are so evasive as far as "hard answers".)

Politics has certainly been susceptible to "fantasy ideology" in recent years, it seems. Conspiracy theories have always attracted fantasists. It would be interesting to speculate on whether fantasies are more common in modern society, or whether we are simply seeing more manifestations because traditional avenues are disappearing...

[Docker]

Excellent post. I was reminded of a paper I read on "fantasy ideology" and people engaged in such fantasy. In essence, all other people are "props" to the fantasy - precisely why rational discourse is impossible. If you disagree, or challenge their viewpoint, you must be a "shill" or a "sheeple"; the option does not exist that you are an educated individual who has analyzed the evidence and arrived at a separate conclusion. All evidence may be arbitrarily dismissed or chosen solely based on the whim and desire of the fantasist; evidence which supports the fantasy is clung to, and evidence which would expose it is dismissed, not necessarily for any rational reason. (Possibly why it is so hard to pin down any truther, and why they are so evasive as far as "hard answers".)

Politics has certainly been susceptible to "fantasy ideology" in recent years, it seems. Conspiracy theories have always attracted fantasists. It would be interesting to speculate on whether fantasies are more common in modern society, or whether we are simply seeing more manifestations because traditional avenues are disappearing...

Your not generalising here at all?

I have never called anyone a shill. To be honest. there is no skeptic in JREF intelligent enough to be in the CIA.

[steve s]

... having an excuse for not doing anything with your life and feeling like a heroic rebel fighting the system (a Luke Skywalker or a Robin Hood perhaps?).


For Dylan & Co. it's more like Neo from The Matrix.


It's like they view human history as a movie, and they refuse to believe that they are't main players in the plot.

And what was it that Dylan dreamed of doing with his life? Oh, yeah. Make movies!

Steve S.

[steve s]

I have never called anyone a shill.

But hundreds of other troofers have.

Steve S.

[Docker]

Talking of fantasies, who made up the fantasy of the magic bullet that penetrated two men, broke bones but remained perfectly intact? Not a conspiracy theorist.

[Docker]

But hundreds of other troofers have.

Steve S.

And? They don't represent me. Some of them claim the planes were holograms, I don't believe that either. It is not fair to label and generalise.

[Donal]

Talking of fantasies, who made up the fantasy of the magic bullet that penetrated two men, broke bones but remained perfectly intact? Not a conspiracy theorist.


Just some kook that happened to be a world renowned physicist and was able to back up his claims.

[R.Mackey]

Your not generalising here at all?

I have never called anyone a shill. To be honest. there is no skeptic in JREF intelligent enough to be in the CIA.
Seems like someone is taking this far too personally.

And thanks for the insult. The mere fact that you would generalize such -- despite the fact that it's wrong -- is enough to let us gauge your true intent and capacity for intelligent discourse here. I'm really not interested in what you think of us, and I suspect I'm not alone.

[maccy]

It's like they view human history as a movie, and they refuse to believe that they are't main players in the plot. They are crucial to the story of humanity. This is why their quest is so important to them.

I think it's common in a lot of areas, particularly amongst young people trying to get into something who have no idea of the hard and frustrating work it involves.

The thing I didn't really say in my first post is that I think that people with obsessive fantasies know, deep down, that they aren't true. They're using them to avoid the pain of dealing with a real issue. If the "Truth" of 911 can (by definition) never be exposed then you can never fail, you will always be right and fighting for justice. Trying to achieve anything at all in the real world inevitably involves failure and pain and requires resilience and growth and learning.

Of course, achieving things through struggle is genuinely satisfying and living in a fantasy world saps the life out of you. Most people manage to sort this out as they get older. Those who don't tend to become depressed or even more seriously mentally ill.

[beachnut]

outstanding post

saying things like, if you hear Alex Jones talking you know you have fallen into a cult group, would not come close to your ideas on the subject of CT

good job

[stateofgrace]

And? They don't represent me. Some of them claim the planes were holograms, I don't believe that either. It is not fair to label and generalise.

No of course it's not.


To be honest. there is no skeptic in JREF intelligent enough to be in the CIA

Great opening post maccy welcome.

[beachnut]

And? They don't represent me. Some of them claim the planes were holograms, I don't believe that either. It is not fair to label and generalise.

it appears you missed the chance to grow out of this CT stuff

which leaves you as d...........

as this post clearly indicates you may have missed the chance to age out of the CT world

[Augustine]

Your not generalising here at all?

I have never called anyone a shill. To be honest. there is no skeptic in JREF intelligent enough to be in the CIA.

I was not talking about you; nor was I talking to you. I was referring to "fantasists"; and yes I am in a sense making generalizations of people engaged in fantasy ideology behavior. The label "fantasist" only fits you if, in all your interactions on this board, other people are merely props.

So, do you address the points other people raise? Do you answer questions directly, and honestly as to your beliefs? Do you confine the discussion to relevant points?

From what I have seen, the "fantasists", or those who view these boards not as discourse or interaction but as fantasy play, do not answer questions. They evade the questions of others. They never cede points, or acknowledge valid points in the arguments of others. They leave a trail of "open" issues unresolved, and open more and more threads on more and more issues that they will eventually abandon later. They jump on the slightest "victory", however irrelevant it may be to the larger issue, or to the central point of the discussion.

Not all people who believe in conspiracy theories are fantasists; however, the behavior I have seen on these boards by individuals supporting conspiracy theories, and what I saw on the LC boards, leads me to believe many conspiracy theorists are.

[Oliver]

Given that they are free to say what they want and to hand out their DVDs and flyers at Ground Zero, there is essentially no risk at all to what they do, no matter how much they feel like rebels.

Any thoughts?

Matthew

I would like to see some of these as****les walking around in Bagdad handing out DVD´s and telling everyone that X00,000 dead iraqis is just a conspiracy from the iraqi government. I would give them 30 minutes before they and their movement disappear.

The point is that they confuse the victims with their crap and most of them give a Fart about that while pushing their anti-Gov propaganda even knowing that their theories are crap.

[PerryLogan]

I guess I can't blame the CTs for being ticked off about this thread. No one likes to see people speculate on their possible mental disorders.

But then, they do this to us constantly, right?

Right.

So let's start with five major symptoms:

CTs tend to think anyone who disagrees with them must be working with the other side. Everyone who has ever talked to them has been called an agent or a shill. I know of no political group, from communist to fascist, who make this extraordinary leap other than CTs. This definitely sets them apart.

CTs see brainwashing everywhere, yet they think they're immune. They think virtually the whole world is brainwashed or compartmentalized or just unbelievably stupid. This also sets them apart from just about any human group in the world.

CTs are obsessed with predicting the future, and they sometimes actually think they can predict the future. They just ignore the fact that their predictions never come true. I name no names.

CTs often believe they can see clues where no one else can see them. This is quite a remarkable delusion. Alex Jones, to name a name, says he realized 9/11 was coming from clues the guests were dropping on the Chris Matthews Show. Think about it: of all the millions who saw the show, Alex believes that only he saw the secret clues. That's quite a belief.

CTs honest-to-God believe they're enlightened. I'm sure you've heard them talk about when they woke up, and when are we going to wake up, and the whole bit. Few of them even try to hide their high opinion of themselves. Sometimes this is funny; sometimes it's just creepy as hell.

[Oliver]

Alex Jones, to name a name, says he realized 9/11 was coming from clues the guests were dropping on the Chris Matthews Show. Think about it: of all the millions who saw the show, Alex believes that only he saw the secret clues. That's quite a belief.

Alex Jones like some other idiots is making money for his living!

Period.

[maccy]

Alex Jones like some other idiots is making money for his living!

Period.

I hope you don't mind me quoting you at normal volume :).

Yes, I was thinking about that in relation to the point about Dylan's fantasy to be a filmaker. In a way, of course, he is - although I'd be surprised if makes any films that aren't for the CT Market.

Some CTists reach an accommodation with the real world by supporting themselves financially through other peoples delusions. It's like a pyramid scheme of delusion. In fact if the people at the top of the pyramid stop believing, they don't really have a finacial incentive to let on.

[Oliver]

I hope you don't mind me quoting you at normal volume :).

Yes, I was thinking about that in relation to the point about Dylan's fantasy to be a filmaker. In a way, of course, he is - although I'd be surprised if makes any films that aren't for the CT Market.

Some CTists reach an accommodation with the real world by supporting themselves financially through other peoples delusions. It's like a pyramid scheme of delusion. In fact if the people at the top of the pyramid stop believing, they don't really have a finacial incentive to let on.

Oh yes! I do mind! :D

But kidding aside - i think Dylan, Kleist, Jones and Co know that they are talking bullcrap. Especially Jones and Louder than Words. That was the reason for banning everyone shifting slightly in the "false" direction.

And that Alex Jones is a liar is clearly visible in the footage at ground zero, "discussing" with gravy.

[W6102LA]

http://www.newspolls.org/story.php?story_id=55

Some interesting poll results in this article reguarding people who believe in conspiracy theories :)

[kc440_]

Talking of fantasies, who made up the fantasy of the magic bullet that penetrated two men, broke bones but remained perfectly intact? Not a conspiracy theorist.

I guess I fall under the category of Conspiracy Theorist. A wonderful President, with his own vision for this country, was killed from a bullet that came from the right front. The Zapruder film, as hacked up as it is, shows you the mortal wound came from the grassy knoll. It shows you this. Yet people who don't like Kennedy, will tell you he was shot and killed from behind. It's right there on the Zapruder Film! The last shot came from the anterior right. Yet, the govt will tell you he was shot from behind. People don't believe their own eyes!

kc440

[Gravy]

Welcome, maccy. Excellent first post.

Yes, the CTs are mostly interested in perpetuating the theories, not in practical applications of any political philosophy they may have. I think of their movement as a "CT workshop." They wait for "Teh Man" to do something they don't like, then they scream about it: to each other. It's more fun that way, and doesn't require much work at all. I like to imagine them having a convention and trying to agree on a political platform...I'd pay good money to see that.

[Gravy]

I guess I fall under the category of Conspiracy Theorist. Let me put on my "big surprise" face. For the umpteenth time, kc (and Docker), take your JFK nonsense to another thread.

[Anti-sophist]

The Zapruder film, as hacked up as it is, shows you the mortal wound came from the grassy knoll. It shows you this.

Why do you claim things that are provably false? That's not at all what it shows. That's the conclusion you've drawn. That is _not_ what it shows, however.

I will explain further in another thread, happily.

[kc440_]

Let me put on my "big surprise" face. For the umpteenth time, kc (and Docker), take your JFK nonsense to another thread.

This thread is about CTs and their psychology. Don't you think many Americans were affected by Kennedy's slaughter? We've learned to distrust this govt.

And don't tell me I can't mention Kennedy here. I'll mention him anywhere I deem appropriate. I guess you're the bully of the forum. Well you won't bully me.

kc440

[kc440_]

Why do you claim things that are provably false? That's not at all what it shows. That's the conclusion you've drawn. That is _not_ what it shows, however.

I will explain further in another thread, happily.

Please, don't tell me about the "head snap."

kc440

[Anti-sophist]

And don't tell me I can't mention Kennedy here. I'll mention him anywhere I deem appropriate. I guess you're the bully of the forum. Well you won't bully me.


Maybe you should, instead, respect the authors intention for this thread and keep it on topic. If you want to talk about the Zapruder film, start your own thread. I'll be there to explain it all, I promise.

[kc440_]

Maybe you should, instead, respect the authors intention for this thread and keep it on topic. If you want to talk about the Zapruder film, start your own thread.

Please understand. This thread is about the psychology of CTs. I'm stating that we're told something (The Warren Commission) but we see another (Z-Film -- I almost feel like I have to whisper its name here).

Gravy doesn't like Kennedy. I'm trying to explain the origins of distrust of the govt. I'm trying to tell you the psychology, at least from my own standpoint, of what that day did to us.

kc440

[gumboot]

The Zapruder film, as hacked up as it is, shows you the mortal wound came from the grassy knoll. It shows you this. Yet people who don't like Kennedy, will tell you he was shot and killed from behind. It's right there on the Zapruder Film! The last shot came from the anterior right. Yet, the govt will tell you he was shot from behind. People don't believe their own eyes!


What is your expertise in photographic interpretation and balistics?

-Gumboot

[maccy]

This thread is about CTs and their psychology. Don't you think many Americans were affected by Kennedy's slaughter? We've learned to distrust this govt.

And don't tell me I can't mention Kennedy here. I'll mention him anywhere I deem appropriate. I guess you're the bully of the forum. Well you won't bully me.

kc440

I would suggest that it makes sense to take discussions of the specifics of the JFK assassination to a separate thread - especially if you are talking about ballistics and trajectories.

In general terms, however, what would satisfy you in an investigation of JFK? Why do you think it is important the issues you think are outstanding are resolved? How are you planning to bring this resolution about? If you don't have a plan to resolve the issues, what is the point of speculating about and researching them?

As far as I can see, every speculative book about the JFK assassination leaves the world largely unchanged. A general distrust of the government is only worthwhile if it encourages people to do something to make the governement more trustworthy. Its not what you think about a situation that matters, it's what you do about it.

I seriously believe that conspiracy theories encourage people to feel impotent. In this way they are actually taking pressure off the governement.

[kc440_]

What is your expertise in photographic interpretation and balistics?

-Gumboot

My expertise, as I've been trying to tell you, is my own eyes.

My own eyes.

kc440

[gumboot]

My expertise, as I've been trying to tell you, is my own eyes.

My own eyes.

kc440


In other words you have none. Thanks.

(You do realise CTers who claim the collapse of the towers "looks exactly like controlled demolition" use precisely the same argument, right?)

-Gumboot

[Anti-sophist]

My expertise, as I've been trying to tell you, is my own eyes.

My own eyes.

kc440

So back to the issue at hand. Psychologically, conspiracy theorists have an extremely difficult time dealing with the fact that their own intuition might be wrong. This goes back to my central thesis that most of the CT mindset is based on arrogance.

Their eyes can't be wrong. Their intuition can't be wrong. They saw it. It's obvious. They know what they saw. Discussion over.

This is simple arrogance. This is a belief that their first impressions are infallible and sufficient. Further analysis is unnecessary. They are right because they say they are right.

Science and math are threatening to them because the existence of science and math imply that analysis outside of your first impression and gut intuition may not be sufficient. There's no need for science or math in a world where first impressions and intuitive interpretations are sufficient to explain the entire world. Therefore, science is fundamentally at odds with the basic psychosis of a conspiracy theorist.

[ktesibios]

Well, just in case anyone is interested in reading the paper on "fantasy ideologies" which Augustine mentioned:

It's probably this article (http://www.policyreview.org/aug02/harris.html) from Policy Review Online. A frequent commenter called "Gracchus" over at Steve Gilliard's New Blog has referred to it many times, so Augustine's post rang a bell in my memory.

[maccy]

Please understand. This thread is about the psychology of CTs. I'm stating that we're told something (The Warren Commission) but we see another (Z-Film -- I almost feel like I have to whisper its name here).

Gravy doesn't like Kennedy. I'm trying to explain the origins of distrust of the govt. I'm trying to tell you the psychology, at least from my own standpoint, of what that day did to us.

kc440

If you could tell the story without trying to make debating points (which is how you started, I feel) and without getting into arguments about the details I'd be very interested - I'd like you to tell your story, not try to present an argument.

What makes the Zapruder film so compelling to you? What conclusions did you reach from this?

Did you come to these conclusions simply from watching the film, or did any other account or literature help you reach this conclusion?

Do you consider that visual media can be misleading (magic tricks, for example)?

What about the Warren Report lead you to conclude that the government was being dishonest?

What makes you that dishonesty in the past has any relevance to today?


If you could also address my previous post about beliefs and actions that'd be cool.

At the moment I'm interested in what you think and why you think as well as what you hope to achieve. I think any arguments that spring from the specifics of this are best taken to other threads.

[StoneWT]

My expertise, as I've been trying to tell you, is my own eyes.

My own eyes.


I was a CT for many years. I believed some of the bad theories about President Kennedy's death. At a certain point, you need to understand your limitations. I am not a photographic analyst. I was being told what was happening by CTers and repeating it as if I had seen it with my own eyes.

You've admitted that you have no qualifications for analyzing the Zapruder film. At a certain point, you need to step back and look yourself in the mirror.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

My expertise, as I've been trying to tell you, is my own eyes.

My own eyes.

kc440

As the Sun swings slowly across the sky and drops below the, horizon the Moon rises in the East. Night is here. It was always thus.

[maccy]

I was a CT for many years. I believed some of the bad theories about President Kennedy's death.

From your perspective as an ex-CT, does my speculation make any sense?

[G-K-4]

Of course, achieving things through struggle is genuinely satisfying and living in a fantasy world saps the life out of you. Most people manage to sort this out as they get older. Those who don't tend to become depressed or even more seriously mentally ill.
... or politically cynical and disengaged. What you point out is one of the reasons why conspiracism is so very much not radical, despite its posturing. If anything, it could be considered reactionary, especially when it gets to the scapegoating and the witch-hunts.

Politics has certainly been susceptible to "fantasy ideology" in recent years, it seems. Conspiracy theories have always attracted fantasists. It would be interesting to speculate on whether fantasies are more common in modern society, or whether we are simply seeing more manifestations because traditional avenues are disappearing...
Those traditional avenues are quieter now, but the roots of conspiracism still bear a strong resemblance to such things as fear of the power of Satan. That's where a lot of the American structure of conspiracy legends began.

For more, see:
http://www.publiceye.org/apocalyptic/Dances_with_Devils_1-01.html#P177_51240

[StoneWT]

From your perspective as an ex-CT, does my speculation make any sense?


It does, but I was more of the young person that was shown some cool material. After several years, I noticed contradictions and shook off the BS. What I believe now is based on sourced material, interviews, and speaking with experts.

Continue to debunk as you never know which person will have his light flipped on.

[ktesibios]

... or politically cynical and disengaged. What you point out is one of the reasons why conspiracism is so very much not radical, despite its posturing. If anything, it could be considered reactionary, especially when it gets to the scapegoating and the witch-hunts.


Things like the ban-fests at the LC forum and the eagerness of so many CTers to brand anyone disagreeing with their catechism as a "shill" or "paid debunker" have led me to think "scratch a CTer and you'll find an authoritarian".

Another thing about CTers in general which seems to me to be a manifestation of a sort of authoritarian populism is the distrust, verging on hatred, of expertise expressed in the reflexive denigration of anything emerging from such agencies as NASA or NIST, or the opinions of individual scientists or engineers if they don't uphold the CT in question.

What's odd is that in ordinary life, most folks, which probably includes most CTers as well, don't have a problem with utilizing appropriate expertise in solving problems. For example, there aren't that many people who don't know to see a dentist about a toothache, an experienced mechanic about that funny noise their car is making, a doctor about an illness or injury or a lawyer about legal problems, as opposed to trying to use "common sense" to deal with the problem (or seeing the dentist about the car, the mechanic about the flu and so on).

But just let someone who actually knows what they're talking about give a technical opinion bearing on a CT that isn't what the CTer wants to hear and out come the knives...

[hellaeon]

I think a general magician can show anyone how the eyes can be deceived.
You always take on board what you see, but CTers wont allow that to change further. I think there is some crazy oppressive stuff going on. If they want to feel important, take a look at that picture taken by hubble years back of one of the deepest darkest points in space we can see that is the size the size of a grain of sand, blown up, it shows 1500 galaxies alone. I seriously get chills and shudder to think of how completely microscopic I must be.

[hellaeon]

It does, but I was more of the young person that was shown some cool material. After several years, I noticed contradictions and shook off the BS. What I believe now is based on sourced material, interviews, and speaking with experts.

Continue to debunk as you never know which person will have his light flipped on.


Hails mate, pretty much the same angle I came from. I did buy a bit into the nexus mag stuff, but my 3-4 year craze started when I quit drugs? go figure....

[uk_dave]

Our eyes and 'common sense' can tell us that a man made object heavier than air cannot fly.

If we throw a stone up in the air in comes back to earth.

When we board a plane we either have to have blind faith that it will fly us to where we are going or we can have an understanding of the principles of aerodynamics.

The CT'ers would convince us that a plane cannot fly because "objects just don't behave like that", in just the same way they would say that the WTC towers couldn't have been brought down by structural damage and fire because "buildings don't collapse like that"

As for the psychology of the CT'ers, I do believe that they show some signs of autistic behaviour, whereby their perception of the world is overbalanced towards order and away from chaos.

Chaotic events are hard for them to comprehend and so they feel a strong desire to find explanations for EVERYTHING, and if the favoured explanation is that an evil cabal of world leaders is behind every seemingly unexplainable event, then it puts into perspective the inadequacies of their own lives.

"Think you're clever but no one listens to you? Well, you know who is to blame for that, don't you?"

If every single minutae of an event such as 9/11 was totally explainable they would probably be happy to accept that version of events. But 9/11 was chaotic. The official version does the best job of explaining these events but there will always be grey areas because much of the evidence is destroyed in the event and first hand accounts are subject to human fallibility. This grey area is where the CT'er lurks and imagines a terrible conspiracy conducted by an all powerful secret power where anything is possible, even ray weapons or holograms, because this is how they percieve the world as a whole.

Oh, and they want fame, fortune and (hopefully) to get laid occasionally.
:D

[maccy]

Those traditional avenues are quieter now, but the roots of conspiracism still bear a strong resemblance to such things as fear of the power of Satan. That's where a lot of the American structure of conspiracy legends began.

For more, see:
http://www.publiceye.org/apocalyptic/Dances_with_Devils_1-01.html#P177_51240

That's really interesting. And, of course, many of the more outlandish conspiracy theories have the Illuminati as a satanic organisation.

It's interesting as well, that in popular usage we still talk about people or groups being "demonised" and about "witch-hunts". I'd always assumed that "witch-hunt" had gained it's present-day metaphor-based meaning as a result of the impact of upon the general conciousness of Arthur Miller's play The Crucible. Now, I wonder if that dea was already around and he just picked up on it.

[Housefly]

The one thing I've always wondered about CTs (using 9/11 as an example) is that there are actual experts in the physical processes involved in buildings collapsing, and actual experts on how you get a building to collapse, and NONE of them agree with the CTs.
Has a CT ever given a reasonable-sounding explanation for this? One that didn't include money, threats or blind loyalty to the conspirators?

Apart from that, the Loose Change forums are an interesting sight. They serve as a sort of feedback loop, with the CTs all reinforcing each other's opinions until they're convinced there's no way they can't be fact. "How can there be any doubt when everyone agrees with me all the time?"
One post in the WTC7 forum said basically "is there any point even talking about this any more? It's so obvious to everyone that WTC7 was a controlled demolition; where's the debate?" I Rule 8 you not.
So are they arrogant because they form these little closed-off agreement orgies, or do they form the orgies because they're so arrogant they don't want to talk to anyone who disagrees with them? Chicken or the egg?

[maccy]

Docker has started a thread with a post from the Loose Change board. The whole post will be torn apart by logic in that thread http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=67087

However, I thought I'd post an excerpt from the Loose Change post here, as it I think it gives some insight to the psychology of at least one LCer:

As American's gear up to impeach the traitor Bush, and stop his perpetual oil war, it's not helpful to have these idiots distracting from the process by spreading silly conspiracy theories about mythical Arabs, stories which do nothing but play into the hands of the extremist Bush regime.

At a less serious time, we might tolerate such crackpots with amused detachment, but they need to understand that the treachery that was perpetrated on Sept 11, and the subsequent war crimes committed in "retaliation", are far too serious for us to allow such frivolous self-indulgence to go unchallenged.

Those who are truly addicted to conspiracy delusions should find a more appropriate outlet for their
Paranoia.

It's time to stop loony conspiracy theories about Sept 11

Edited to add a little context from the same thread:

No, it's not by batsrus. It's a cut and paste job by batsrus. The original is by Gerald Holmgren, a real nut and no-planer. I think some Cts are even a little afraid of the guy.

[kc440_]

This is from 2 of Maccy's posts.

"In general terms, however, what would satisfy you in an investigation of JFK? Why do you think it is important the issues you think are outstanding are resolved? How are you planning to bring this resolution about? If you don't have a plan to resolve the issues, what is the point of speculating about and researching them?

As far as I can see, every speculative book about the JFK assassination leaves the world largely unchanged. A general distrust of the government is only worthwhile if it encourages people to do something to make the governement more trustworthy. Its not what you think about a situation that matters, it's what you do about it.

What makes the Zapruder film so compelling to you? What conclusions did you reach from this?

Did you come to these conclusions simply from watching the film, or did any other account or literature help you reach this conclusion?

Do you consider that visual media can be misleading (magic tricks, for example)?

What about the Warren Report lead you to conclude that the government was being dishonest?

What makes you that dishonesty in the past has any relevance to today?"

-- Ok. Everybody get ready to jump on me.

Maccy doesn't want me to debate specifics about the Kennedy Assassination. If I understand correctly, he wants to know why the Assassination is of such importance to me.

I am Irish and was brought up Roman Catholic. I remember sitting in my father's car, while my parents went to vote for Kennedy in 1960. And I remember when he died. My father used to tell me Hitler was the Devil. Then it became Lee Harvey Oswald.

The nuns at school were crazy about Kennedy. And then he was gone in one shocking moment. As time passed, I recall seeing photos of Oswald -- the "backyard" photos -- that I thought was trick photography. It looked like what it was -- someone's head put on another's body. I began to hear people like Lenny Bruce and Mark Lane saying the fatal wound came from the grassy knoll and there had been more than one shooter. And that the Warren Commission was full of --it. I began to notice that some pictures of Oswald didn't look like him, like his pointed, oddly flat (in profile) head.

Eventually, we all saw the Zapruder Film. It was apparent to me that he was shot from the right side, front. I saw this with my own eyes.

I won't go into specifics about the badly edited mess known as the Z-film in this thread.

I think that my family couldn't talk about President Kennedy. It was too awful. But I learned we all felt that Oswald had a partner on the grassy knoll and finally that the govt was behind it. And after that, I began to feel that the man killed by Ruby might not have had anything to do with the Assassination at all.

And now in recent years, I've read books and consulted various online sites about the Assassination. jfkresearch.com has highly skilled, knowledgable scientists as its members, plus some "lay" people.

What happened with 9/11 brought it all up again.

What would satisfy me regarding the President's death? I don't think anything could. Maybe if Gerald Ford, before he dies, admits the Warren Commission was a hoax. Maybe if the govt came out and said there was more than one Oswald.

What should I be doing about it? Educating the public as to what really happened. Nov. 22, 1963 stated there was something evil in power in America. 9/11 proved it. What would satisfy me? If the Bushes were found guilty in connection with President Kennedy's death and 9/11.

The Iraq war is evil. So many people have died. I see W Bush as one of the most evil men on this planet. He and his rich friends want control over this planet. He doesn't care how many Americans are killed in Iraq. And then it will be Iran and on and on. Kennedy was something of an isolationist. The economy was so much better then. We were happier then.

I think that mankind will be destroyed by atomic bombs from religious zealots.

kc440 :eek:

[hellaeon]

KC, could you explain the kind of reaction you get when you talk to people about it? What do you think of something like the penn and teller test on the pumpkin or whatever it was? Does it make you angry or reaffirm your belief?
Why is it just that - a belief?

What will you do once bush runs his ten year term or looses power by vote? is it the republicans you hate or just bush? Would you feel 9/11 was orchestrated by the US gov if Al gore was in power?

[kc440_]

Chaotic events are hard for them to comprehend and so they feel a strong desire to find explanations for EVERYTHING


This is true of religious people too. I know because I spent 16 years in Catholic schools.

kc440

[kc440_]

KC, could you explain the kind of reaction you get when you talk to people about it? What do you think of something like the penn and teller test on the pumpkin or whatever it was? Does it make you angry or reaffirm your belief?
Why is it just that - a belief?

What will you do once bush runs his ten year term or looses power by vote? is it the republicans you hate or just bush? Would you feel 9/11 was orchestrated by the US gov if Al gore was in power?

As far as I know, Al Gore isn't a part of any secret societies. (Clinton was.) So, I wouldn't have thought it came from him. I voted for Al Gore.

The reaction I get telling this to people is one of frustration. Why hit my head against a brick wall?

I never saw Penn and Teller's pumpkin routine.

As for when Bush's term is over my old motto will suffice -- when in doubt, vote for the Democrat.

kc440

[gumboot]

I'd always assumed that "witch-hunt" had gained it's present-day metaphor-based meaning as a result of the impact of upon the general conciousness of Arthur Miller's play The Crucible. Now, I wonder if that dea was already around and he just picked up on it.


The Crucible and "witch-hunt" may have a slightly more direct relationship than just him picking up on it (my bolding):

witch hunt
1640 in the literal sense; the extended sense is attested from 1932 (in witch-hunting), popularized in Cold War anti-Communist hysteria.
Source (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=witch&searchmode=none)

The Crucible is a play that was written by Arthur Miller in 1952. It is based on the events surrounding the 1692 witch trials of Salem, Massachusetts. Miller wrote about the event as an allegory for McCarthyism and the Red Scare, which occurred in the United States in the 1950s.
Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Crucible)

While the term "witch-hunt" (in the general sense) appears to pre-date his play by a couple of decades, it sounds like his work popularised the term.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

The Iraq war is evil. So many people have died. I see W Bush as one of the most evil men on this planet. He and his rich friends want control over this planet. He doesn't care how many Americans are killed in Iraq. And then it will be Iran and on and on. Kennedy was something of an isolationist. The economy was so much better then. We were happier then.


I think this sums up the CT view point perfectly, doesn't it?

It's not about facts. It's about personal biased world-view, which they cling to like limpets to a rock. Because it is their rock. If their world-view is undermined, suddenly the world becomes a confusing, unpredictable, and chaotic place where they are like a feather on the wind.

-Gumboot

[maccy]

Thanks kc440_ I won't be jumping on you: not here, at any rate. Your general story was interesting, but I won't comment on the first part at the moment. I'm going to skip to where you've answered some of my questions, which I've bolded, for clarity



What would satisfy me regarding the President's death? I don't think anything could. Maybe if Gerald Ford, before he dies, admits the Warren Commission was a hoax. Maybe if the govt came out and said there was more than one Oswald.

What should I be doing about it? Educating the public as to what really happened. Nov. 22, 1963 stated there was something evil in power in America. 9/11 proved it. What would satisfy me? If the Bushes were found guilty in connection with President Kennedy's death and 9/11.

I think you can expand on this by answering some of my other questions:

Did you come to these conclusions simply from watching the film, or did any other account or literature help you reach this conclusion?

Do you consider that visual media can be misleading (magic tricks, for example)?

What about the Warren Report lead you to conclude that the government was being dishonest?

What makes you that dishonesty in the past has any relevance to today?

Answers to these would help my understanding of where you're coming from.

Also you'll note that my original question was what are you doing or planning to do not what do you think you should be doing? I'm interested in actions not words. If all you do is theorise about conspiracies then it seems to be that you may as well be delusion - even if you are not - for all the difference it makes to the world.

Which leads on to the last part of your reply.

The Iraq war is evil. So many people have died. I see W Bush as one of the most evil men on this planet. He and his rich friends want control over this planet. He doesn't care how many Americans are killed in Iraq. And then it will be Iran and on and on. Kennedy was something of an isolationist. The economy was so much better then. We were happier then.

I think that mankind will be destroyed by atomic bombs from religious zealots.This, to me, reads like you feel that the US government is irredeemably evil and that the world is doomed and there is nothing you can do.

On and off, I've been campaigning against Nuclear Weapons since 1983. I've been involved in protests against both Gulf Wars and the war in Afgahnistan. Were I an American citizen I would be actively campaigning for the Democrats in the upcoming elections and in 2008. In doing so I have never had to try and win an argument about whether the issue existed or not. Clearly there is a war in Iraq, everybody agrees on that - what to do about it is the political struggle, this is why activists take action.

I can't see why the continued acceptance of the official view of either the Kennedy Assassination or the 9/11 Tragedy means that the actions of the current administration cannot be stopped unless "the truth" is revealed.

Shouldn't we be focusing in what Bush is doing now, rather than what he might have done? If only for pragmatic reasons?

OK you've got a bit of an argument. But only I hope to spur you into answering why you think it is more important to focus on things that have been and gone rather than things that are happening now - if indeed that is what you think.

Matthew

PS I'm using my own political views as an example here - I don't want to start a discussion about them.

[kc440_]

I seem to be having trouble with my computer tonight. Very slow. I posted a long answer to your questions, Matthew. I hope it shows up -- AOL.

kc440

[kc440_]

In general terms, however, what would satisfy you in an investigation of JFK? Why do you think it is important the issues you think are outstanding are resolved? How are you planning to bring this resolution about? If you don't have a plan to resolve the issues, what is the point of speculating about and researching them?


Here goes. I can remember waiting in the car on election day 1960 as my parents went in to vote for Kennedy. Then this great man, who had a vision for this country, was gone in an obscene slaughter.

We had a nun in school who thought Kennedy was great. Then he was killed. At this time, we had an influx of Cuban kids into our school, in West New York, NJ. Every once in awhile, the nun would look at a Cuban kid and say, "Why don't you go back to where you came from?" We kids didn't understand what was going on. She picked on this tall, chubby Cuban kid, God knows why. There were 44 kids in the class. This kid had to go to the closet in back of the room and take out half the coats. If he dropped a coat, he had to put his own coat near the doorway and we were all instructed to "Walk on his coat." So we'd be pulling the coats from his arms and invariably we used his coat as a doormat. It all seemed funny.

After those 4 days in November 1963, my family didn't talk about it. We never talked about it. But it was always there.

Lenny Bruce and Mark Lane began to criticize the Warren Commission. This eventually trickled down to me. There was another killer on the grassy knoll. I began to see photos of Lee Harvey Oswald in Life mag. The "backyard" photos looked just what they were: one man's head stuck on another man's body. I noticed Oswald looked different in some pictures. The man who was shot by Ruby, had a flat head in profile -- weird. But I saw other pictures that really didn't look like him.

This was the beginning of my belief in conspiracy.

What would satisfy me in connection with President Kennedy? If George Herbert Walker Bush was arrested and convicted of involvement in Kennedy's death. If George W. Bush was arrested and convicted in the killing of so many people on 9/11 and bringing about this illegal war with Iraq. Wasn't it a strange coincidence that Bush was visiting England the day the British subway was bombed?

The only thing I can do about it is to educate people, get them thinking. I'm not going to walk around in a circle with a cardboard sign. And I'm not half as knowledgable as Rich DellaRosa of jfkresearch.com. He would put Gravy in his place in no time.

I hope that answers your questions.

kc440

[Gravy]

Ugh.

[Anti-sophist]

As for the psychology of the CT'ers, I do believe that they show some signs of autistic behaviour, whereby their perception of the world is overbalanced towards order and away from chaos.

Chaotic events are hard for them to comprehend and so they feel a strong desire to find explanations for EVERYTHING, and if the favoured explanation is that an evil cabal of world leaders is behind every seemingly unexplainable event, then it puts into perspective the inadequacies of their own lives.


I think there is a better analogy than autism, and that is religious fundamentalism. The similiarities between a conspiracy theorist and a religious fundamentalist are striking. They deep need for order has always been filled by God. Unfortunate events are God's will. That's how religion helps to make these things seem purposeful. The super-secret shadow government is the CTer's god. He is all-knowing, all-powerful, and incredibly effective. He is a mean and vengeful god, though, to be feared for sure. Everything, again, has a purpose.

The foundation of their belief is very faith-like. We assume a conspiracy, and from there the entire world view follows. The conspiracy is an axiom of their world view. Religious people, philsophically, came to terms with this a _long_ time ago and named this axiom "faith". They know they cannot prove their axiom, so they must assume it to be true.

CTers haven't (and probably never will) realize that they assume a conspiracy on faith, and from there everything follows. They have mixed themselves up in a circlular logic web that will probably never be broken. The vast majority of them are poorly educated on these issues and get so lost in the logical mess that it's hopeless to ever extract them. They don't understand the onus of proof, occam's razor, or the value of falsifiable propisitions. It's impossible to shake them loose long enough to even force them to realize that they _start_ with the assumption that the conspiracy is taking place.

This thread, by the way, is fascinating.

[defaultdotxbe]

one the thing si notice is that alot of the CT-prone people have a flawed worldview from the beginning, they think the world is already an orwellian, big brother type society where the the government is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent

natnaturally with that type of mindset a few people coul dnever get away with hijacking a plane or committing ANY major crime without the governments help, or at leasts its OK, LIHOP/MIHOP becomes a given


another thing i notice is the similarities to paranoid-schizoprenia

Inability to make decisions
or settle on a single theory
Hallucinations
anyone else see that concrete core?
Changes in eating or sleeping habits, energy level, or weight
cant say much for this on the internet, but i wouldnt doubt it
Delusions
this one almost goes without saying for some folk
Nervousness
seems about right
Strange statements or behavior
i think this one is an understatement
Withdrawal from friends, work, or school
well we know some of the LC forum residents have lost girlfriends and even wives over there (then theres charlie sheen)
Neglect of personal hygiene
again, cant say much over the internet (thankfully) but keep and eye on micheal moores hygiene and youll see what i mean
Anger
yep
Indifference to the opinions of others
definately
A tendency to argue
oh yeah
A conviction that you are better than others, or that people are out to get you
2 words: Alex. Jones.


not to say all CTers a paranoid schizoprenics, but im sure a good number are (undiagnosed perhaps) and perhaps many share the same imbalance, but to a lesser degree

[PerryLogan]

We've got quite a few intriguing diagnoses here--but when I think about conspiracy guys, I always think about MEGALOMANIA, now known as narcissistic personality disorder.

Just imagine a stupid person with an incredibly inflated ego, and I think you have a good model for the CT psyche. The big ego keeps him from knowing he's stupid, so he spews out bizarre theories and can't understand the arguments and evidence that disprove him.

Is this not the pattern for every conspiracy guy you ever met?

NARCISSITIC PERSONALITY DISORDER is apparently a real diagnostic category. Here are the symptoms:

A narcissistic individual is grandiose in their sense of self-importance and exaggerates their achievements and talents. He expects to be recognized as superior without achieving any great accomplishments.

A narcissistic individual is preoccupied with fantasies of his brilliance as well as his unlimited success or power. He fantasizes about beauty or ideal love.

A narcissistic individual believes that he is "special" or "unique." He feels that he can only be understood by or should associate with other special or high status people.

A narcissistic individual requires excessive admiration and is on a constant search for admiration.

A narcissistic individual has a sense of entitlement. He has unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment and expect others to automatically comply with his wishes.

A narcissistic individual takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends and uses others without regards to the feelings of others.

A narcissistic individual lacks empathy and does not identify with the feelings or needs of others.

A narcissstic individual is envious of others and believes that others are envious of him.

A narcissistic individual shows arrogant or haughty behaviors or attitudes and does not care who he offends.
http://www.angelfire.com/ego/narcissism/

[maccy]

I have had few thoughts that I'll post here later (I've got, um, real-world stuff to do instead) but I think we should be a little cautious about making references to mental illness.

The general descriptions of these illnesses are just that - general descriptions. A specific diagnosis is only made by a professional after long conversations with the individual to assess both their present state and their history.

Also, I am very far from being an expert in psychology but my understanding is that many people could relate to at least some of symptoms of various mental illnesses either mildly, or in certain situations (under stress, for example). The point of mental illness is that the symptoms are extreme and take over a person's life to the point of debilitating them.

It is interesting to point out similarities between the thought structure required to maintain a delusional belief and the general symptoms of mental illness. But it is entirely possible that those thought stuctures only apply to the persons belief in the conspiracy, not to the rest of their life. In other words, people can belive odd things without being mad.

I realise that people posting the mental illness stuff were not necessarily implying a strong connection, but I fear it could be interpreted this way and I think we should be clear about the limits of both our expertise and the available information on this issue.

[uk_dave]

I was just speculating about a hypothesis. I know I don't know nothing.

(Name that film)

[PerryLogan]

I'm sticking to my guns. CTs are just not right. They obviously have some sort of disorder. I think it's NPD.

Alex Jones thinks he can predict the future. Every conspiracy guy in the world thinks he's a genius.

That's MEGALOMANIA, baby!

[Crungy]

Here goes. I can remember waiting in the car on election day 1960 as my parents went in to vote for Kennedy. Then this great man, who had a vision for this country, was gone in an obscene slaughter.

We had a nun in school who thought Kennedy was great. Then he was killed. At this time, we had an influx of Cuban kids into our school, in West New York, NJ. Every once in awhile, the nun would look at a Cuban kid and say, "Why don't you go back to where you came from?" We kids didn't understand what was going on. She picked on this tall, chubby Cuban kid, God knows why. There were 44 kids in the class. This kid had to go to the closet in back of the room and take out half the coats. If he dropped a coat, he had to put his own coat near the doorway and we were all instructed to "Walk on his coat." So we'd be pulling the coats from his arms and invariably we used his coat as a doormat. It all seemed funny.

After those 4 days in November 1963, my family didn't talk about it. We never talked about it. But it was always there.

Lenny Bruce and Mark Lane began to criticize the Warren Commission. This eventually trickled down to me. There was another killer on the grassy knoll. I began to see photos of Lee Harvey Oswald in Life mag. The "backyard" photos looked just what they were: one man's head stuck on another man's body. I noticed Oswald looked different in some pictures. The man who was shot by Ruby, had a flat head in profile -- weird. But I saw other pictures that really didn't look like him.

This was the beginning of my belief in conspiracy.

What would satisfy me in connection with President Kennedy? If George Herbert Walker Bush was arrested and convicted of involvement in Kennedy's death. If George W. Bush was arrested and convicted in the killing of so many people on 9/11 and bringing about this illegal war with Iraq. Wasn't it a strange coincidence that Bush was visiting England the day the British subway was bombed?

The only thing I can do about it is to educate people, get them thinking. I'm not going to walk around in a circle with a cardboard sign. And I'm not half as knowledgable as Rich DellaRosa of jfkresearch.com. He would put Gravy in his place in no time.

I hope that answers your questions.

kc440

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald.htm#photos
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/photos.txt
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/experts.htm
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/groden1.htm

Belief, but no evidence required, eh? Sounds like a prerequisite to become a CT.

[maccy]

I'm bumping this thread, rather than starting a new one, as I've just found a blog posts that shows the weird anti-political psychology of the "Truth Movement". Basically, it posits that idea that Bush is good for the movement and so its members should vote for Giuliani in 2008:

http://sonsanddaughtersofliberty.net/bullhorn/zenith.html

via

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2557

[boloboffin]

Wow, that's the same kind of logic Gulbiddin Hekmatyar employed to endorse Bush for a third term. Qui bono, indeed...

[Anti-sophist]

Personality Disorder Information

Paranoid (http://www.4degreez.com/disorder/paranoid.html)
Paranoid personality disorder is characterized by a distrust of others and a constant suspicion that people around you have sinister motives. People with this disorder tend to have excessive trust in their own knowledge and abilities and usually avoid close relationships with others. They search for hidden meanings in everything and read hostile intentions into the actions of others. They are quick to challenge the loyalties of friends and loved ones and often appear cold and distant to others. They usually shift blame to others and tend to carry long grudges.

http://www.4degreez.com/misc/disorder_information2.html