In Defense Of The Conspiratorial World View

[icymist]

A lot of effort goes into "debunking" conspiracy theories, and certainly there are many which are absurd, and poorly defended. But the tendency to find conspiracies to explain events, is anything but rooted in ignorance.

One of the things which separates man from the rest of the Animal kingdom, is his intellectual capacity to recognize patterns. A human being sees a square peg and a square hole, and knows they go together. A monkey presumably has trouble unless taught.

<snip>

We use the concept of conspiracy every day in our legal system, and there would be many thousands more criminals walking our streets were we not to recognize and include the concept of conspiracy in trials. Yet somehow, a vastly different standard has been applied to certain historic crimes over the decades when the public demands a logical explanation for the extraordinary events in question.

Current polls now show that a majority of Americans believe the government is not telling them the truth about 9-11. That fact now makes the majority of Americans "conspiracy theorists" regarding the issue. It is now a minority of the public who believes they were told the truth by the Bush appointed 9-11 Commission, but such is not the case among the so-called "mainstream media". It is nearly universally hostile to any question of a cover-up by the government. Those who need the world to make sense do not find the disparity between public opinion and the media elite's contempt for suspicion to be meaningless. They reasonably look for a vested conflict of interest on the part of the corporate media to explain why presumably intelligent professionals go soft in the head, and they do not have to look far to find one; a media which sits in an unelected advisory capacity to the President of the United States through the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations), innumerable "think tanks" funded by corporate interests all assuming a global model is "inevitable", and directly attached special interests which include the world's biggest defense contractors raking billions of dollars in for share holders as they pursue the war profits of 9-11. People who point out the obvious are not wearing tin foil hats, they're simply...pointing out the obvious.

Read the article

[respublicus]

1. Without MSM, twice as many would believe 911 conspiracy

"In September 1996 George Magazine published a poll showing that 74% of adult Americans – practically three out of four – believe that the US government is regularly involved in secret, conspiratorial operations."

- Mathias Broeckers in "Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories and the Secrets of 9/11"

The 74% were right, of course. It goes on all the time.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. The complicity of the media in burying the story

merely helps to demonstrate the vast proportions of the conspiracy.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. ...soon to be consigned to the 9-11 dungeon, no doubt.

As an inveterate aluminophiliac, I despair.

[icymist]

3. Wow! What a great line in this article, something I'll keep with me:

<snip>
Although the rampant law breaking of George W. Bush is openly discussed, the notion that a demonstratedly criminal administration would commit every crime imaginable and lie about virtually everything with the sole exception of the one event that enables them to continue to commit the crimes, is still something which will result in rabid a attacks on anyone who dares to ask the obvious question.

[petgoat]

28. I found the context of the Vanity Fair article about Loose Change

interesting.

First you read a story about birth defects in Vietnam because of agent orange.
While reading it you think of birth defects in Iraq since the Gulf War, and
think: "Our government is capable of enormous crimes against innocent people."

Then you turn the page and it's all about the 9/11 conspiracy theories--against
which about the only defense is "Our government would never do anything so evil."

[salvorhardin]

5. There are problems with that opinion piece

The culture of derision against the conspiratorial world view has real consequences today. If 9/11 was in fact the inside job so much evidence indicates that it was, unless that evidence is taken seriously, we risk continuing down a path that has no basis in reality. Self-proclaimed debunkers are fond of the axiom "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof". If this is true, then do not extremely serious accusations warrant extremely serious investigations?

No. Extraordinary claims on their own do not warrant "extremely serious investigation".

"icymist is working for Karl Rove and is attempting to make lefties look like barking moonbats and discredit the movement."

That's an extraordinary claim. Why aren't you all seriously investigating it?

Because it's nonsense and I haven't provided any evidence to support my claim.

Now, many 9-11 conspiracists will claim, as this opinion piece does, that there are mounds of evidence. The problem is that most of the so-called evidence has been found to be either based on myth, rumours and innuendo (often originating with extreme right wing sources) or been shown (repeatedly) to be bunk. An example of the first would be the myths relating to the "stand down" (http://www.911myths.com/html/stand_down.html). An example of the second would be the controlled demolition conspiracy theory.

Of course, if you're a True Believer you think everything is part of the conspiracy and you're beyond reason.

Does that mean there aren't real questions in relation to 9-11? Of course it doesn't. Whether through incompetence or callous disregard, in all likelihood the attacks on 9-11 might have been prevented. Why weren't they? What were the failure points? Why did these 19 men who were already on the FBI's radar screen slip through the system? There are a lot of questions you could be asking, and some of them might have small, event conspiracies as their answers. Or they might not.

Most of you don't care though. You need the grand Manichean apocalyptic struggle between Good and EVIL because that's how you see the world. That there might be better, more productive frames of analysis escapes your grasp and everything gets filtered through your monoview.

[BuddyYoung]

6. BIGGEST problem is failure to explain role of paid Disinfo Agents

He doesn't mention the role of PR firms (Renton Group, Hill & Knowlton etc.) in spreading disinformation and propaganda on behalf of U.S. Administrations, and he doesn't talk about how professionals are used to suppress dissent from the Official Version of the 911 Conspiracy.

[KJF]

7. Jared Israel

Your post seems to imply (correct me if I'm wrong) that you think Jared Israel is an extreme right-winger. Why do you think this? I don't particularly agree with him on a fair few things, but I wouldn't class him as an extreme right-winger.

[salvorhardin]

8. No. I am implying nothing.

I really know nothing about Jared Israel.

See this entry in my journal for two examples of extreme right wingers who have influenced 9-11 conspiracy theories: David Irving and Michael Rivero.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/salvorhardin/124

[KJF]

9. No

You wrote:

"The problem is that most of the so-called evidence has been found to be either based on myth, rumours and innuendo (often originating with extreme right wing sources) or been shown (repeatedly) to be bunk. An example of the first would be the myths relating to the "stand down"."

You clearly say that an example of the first - "myth, rumours and innuendo (often originating with extreme right wing sources)" - is the "myths relating to the "stand down"."

Jared Israel published his take on the "stand down" on 14 November 2001. It is the first such article of which I am aware. You freely admitted you do not consider Jared Israel an extreme right wing author. Please either direct me to a previous article by an extreme right wing author on the "stand down" or retract your claim.

[salvorhardin]

11. For those with impaired reading comprehension...

I said...

The problem is that most of the so-called evidence has been found to be either based on myth, rumours and innuendo (often originating with extreme right wing sources) or been shown (repeatedly) to be bunk. An example of the first would be the myths relating to the "stand down" (http://www.911myths.com/html/stand_down.html).

Let's take a look at some crucial words in that excerpt from my post.

Main Entry: 1many
Pronunciation: 'me-nE
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): more /'mor/; most /'mOst/
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English manig; akin to Old High German manag many, Old Church Slavic munogu much
1 : consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number <worked for many years>
2 : being one of a large but indefinite number <many a man> <many another student>
- as many : the same in number <saw three plays in as many days>
http://m-w.com/dictionary/most

Main Entry: of·ten
Pronunciation: 'o-f&n, ÷'of-t&n
Function: adverb
Etymology: Middle English, alteration of oft
: many times : FREQUENTLY

Did I say ALL? Did I say ALWAYS? No, I said most and I said often. Both words qualify what is being spoke of as being a significant number but less than 100%.

Did I say my example was an example of a myth AND an example of a something that originated with the extreme right wing? No. I did not say that.

You were confused and asked me to clarify. That's cool. I did so. I do not know enough about Jared Israel's history to know if he's an extreme right winger. There. I just said it again.

But obviously reading comprehension is a skill that eludes you, so let me try one more time.

Jared Israel may or may not be an extreme right winger who, regardless of his political and philosophical leanings (of which I am unaware), has advanced incorrect knowledge regarding 9-11. However, David Irving and Michael Rivero are BOTH extreme right wingers who have advanced bogus knowledge regarding 9-11.

Hope that helps.

[KJF]

12. Please specify

You gave "myths relating to the stand down" as an example of "myth, rumours and innuendo (often originating with extreme right wing sources)".

Now you admit that you have no idea whether the "myth of the stand down" originated from an extreme right wing source or not.

The other argument you mentioned - explosive demolition of the WTC - does not originate from an extreme right wing source either.

Please provide a list of specific arguments used by the 9/11 truth movement that originate from extreme right-wing sources.

[salvorhardin]

13. Like I said

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. That's OK. I'll let you go back to your spy vs. spy comics.

[dailykoff]

15. So your claims have no basis in fact

but you still believe them?

I think those are the real 911myths.

[KJF]

20. Name them

You said that most of the arguments advanced by the 9/11 truth movement are "myth, rumours and innuendo (often originating with extreme right wing sources)".

Hovever, when I asked you to "provide a list of specific arguments used by the 9/11 truth movement that originate from extreme right-wing sources", you were unable to supply a single one. That's telling.

If you don't know with whom the 9/11 truth movement's claims originated, how can you say many of them originated with extreme right wing sources?

[salvorhardin]

21. I supplied you with two

The link is in my post above. You know, there are adult remedial reading courses. You needn't be ashamed.

[KJF]

22. 2 isn't "often"

You said they "often" originate with extreme right-wing sources. You have not yet produced, or even claimed to have produced, evidence to substantiate the word "often". In addition, you are backing away from the word "originate" - in your post 8 you said that Rivero and Irving had "influenced" 9-11 conspiracy theories, not originated them. Further, the claims to which you are referring, as far as I can tell from your unspecific style, are highly peripheral to the movement.

Your "Evidence"
(1) You claim in your journal "Almost all of the 9-11 Truth movement is however being influenced by conspiracist sources. For instance, much of the concern with Larry Silverstein (and the role of Jews in the events of 9-11) originates with holocaust denier David Irving and La Voz de Aztlán,"

However, you only attempt to substantiate this sweeping claim with one article, the 9/11 part of which is basically just a rehash of previously available information such as, "It is estimated that about 5,000 workers died when the city's tallest structures collapsed after being hit by two passenger jet airlines commandeered by terrorists." The figure of 5,000 is obviously wrong, but what else worries you about this sentence? What claims do you think originate here? By whom are you saying this is being copied?

(2) Your second point is even worse. You write: "Another example I use is of Michael Rivero and WhatReallyHappened.com, often used both as a source of information and as an avenue of disseminating information relating to the 9-11 Truth Movement."
However, you again neglect to specify any claim which (you say) originates with Rivero.

If you could point to a claim that I believed that you can show originates with Rivero (or anybody like that) I would happily subject it to additional scrutiny, but you have not yet done so.

[icymist]

14. Wow! This attention to little old me?!

I'm flattered! Besides, I am a moonbat! I originally put the OP in the 'articles' section and I see now that it had been condemned to the 9/11 section regardless of how this article addresses all conspiratorial theories! I do see your point, but however, how do you explain this misadministration's practice of misguiding the American people (taking away Civil rights, lying into an unnecessary war, giving more money to the wealthiest while at war, etc...) while maintaining an atmosphere of fear of terrorism? Is not September 11th the root? That is the incident which justifies all the other criminal acts against, not only this country, but the world? Why then, should not the American people be allowed to look at this issue closer? Would not such an investigation put this issue to rest once and for all? Or is there something that is to be afraid of leaking out? Frankly, to not look closer to the 9/11 commission report and maybe do it over is just like saying that there is something to hide.

on edit to clear up my boldness. (i made too many bold fonts)

[icymist]

16. Let me also say sir,

I believe you to be a tool of the powers that be. You, not only, present their argument, but present the way of view that is dominant in the so-called main stream media. I would also venture to believe that you might be employed by right wing sources. Can you prove different?

[salvorhardin]

18. Well, you know what they say.

Takes one to know one. See you at The Company picnic next week.

[mirandapriestly]

19. Now you see what we are up against.

Mr hardon is not representative of the posters in the 911 forum, however. Thanks so much for posting the article I think it's great!

[BuddyYoung]

23. I'm not so sure of that. He's beginning to appear to be very

representative and maybe that's why people (on other 911 forums) refer to them as "DURepublicans".

[salvorhardin]

25. I lurve you too

The conspiracist blames societal or individual problems on what turns out to be a demonized scapegoat. Conspiracism is a narrative form of scapegoating that portrays an enemy as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good. Conspiracism assigns tiny cabals of evildoers a superhuman power to control events, frames social conflict as part of a transcendent struggle between Good and Evil, and makes leaps of logic, such as guilt by association, in analyzing evidence. Conspiracists often employ common fallacies of logic in analyzing factual evidence to assert connections, causality, and intent that are frequently unlikely or nonexistent. As a distinct narrative form of scapegoating, conspiracism uses demonization to justify constructing the scapegoats as wholly evil while reconstructing the scapegoater as a hero.

The current wave of conspiracism has two main historic sources, irrational fears of a freemason conspiracy and irrational fears of a Jewish conspiracy. There are many purveyors of the conspiracist worldview and the belief structure is surprisingly widespread. Conspiracist ideas are promoted by several right-wing institutions, the John Birch Society, the Liberty Lobby, and the Lyndon LaRouche networks. These groups are examples of right-wing populism in which conspiracist narratives such as producerism are common. In Western culture, conspiracist scapegoating is rooted in apocalyptic fears and millennial expectations. Sometimes conspiracism is secularized and adopted by portions of the political left. It is interesting to note that on both the left and the right (as well as the center) there are critics of the apocalyptic style and flawed methodology of conspiracism.

In highlighting conspiracist allegation as a form of scapegoating, it is important to remember the following:

• All conspiracist theories start with a grain of truth, which is then transmogrified with hyperbole and filtered through pre-existing myth and prejudice,
• People who believe conspiracist allegations sometimes act on those irrational beliefs, which has concrete consequences in the real world,
• Conspiracist thinking and scapegoating are symptoms, not causes, of underlying societal frictions, and as such are perilous to ignore,
• scapegoating and conspiracist allegations are tools that can be used by cynical leaders to mobilize a mass following
• Supremacist and fascist organizers use conspiracist theories as a relatively less-threatening entry point in making contact with potential recruits
• Even when conspiracist theories do not center on Jews, people of color, or other scapegoated groups, they create an environment where racism, anti-Semitism, and other forms of prejudice and oppression can flourish.

http://www.publiceye.org/top_conspire.html

[petgoat]

29. Do you deny that the PNAC Statement of Principles is a blueprint

for global domination?

Do you deny that PNAC representation in the White House is pervasive?

Do you deny that current federal policies are in line with PNAC goals?

Do you deny that utilizing the federal government to institute a plan
of global domination would be a conspiracy?

You seem to be arguing that conspiracies don't exist. Have you ever
read Shakespeare? Take away conpirators plotting and you'd have no
plays at all.

[salvorhardin]

31. Non sequitur, ad captandum and apophenia

Non sequitur is Latin for "it does not follow." In formal logic, an argument is a non sequitur if the conclusion does not follow from the premise. It should be stressed that in a non sequitur, the conclusion can be either true or false, but the argument is a fallacy because the conclusion does not follow from the premise. All logical fallacies are actually just specific types of non sequiturs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29

In rhetoric an argument ad captandum, "for capturing" the gullibility of the naïve among the listeners or readers, is an unsound, specious argument, a kind of seductive casuistry. The longer form of the term is ad captandum vulgus (Latin, 'to win over the crowd').
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_captandum

Apophenia is the experience of seeing patterns or connections in random or meaningless data. The term was coined in 1958 by Klaus Conrad, who defined it as the "unmotivated seeing of connections" accompanied by a "specific experience of an abnormal meaningfulness".

Conrad originally described this phenomenon in relation to the distortion of reality present in psychosis, but it has become more widely used to describe this tendency in healthy individuals without necessarily implying the presence of neurological or mental illness.

In statistics, apophenia would be classed as a Type II error (false alarm). Apophenia is often used as an explanation of paranormal and religious claims. It has been suggested that apophenia is a link between psychosis and creativity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

[petgoat]

32. Is you or is you not denying that conspiracies exist? nt

[salvorhardin]

33. False dichotomy

The logical fallacy of false dilemma (also known as falsified dilemma, fallacy of the excluded middle, black and white thinking, false dichotomy, false correlative, either/or dilemma or bifurcation), involves a situation in which two alternative points of view are held to be the only options, when in reality there exist one or more alternate options which have not been considered. The two alternatives presented are often, though not always, the two extreme points on some spectrum. Instead of such extreme simplification and wishful thinking, considering the whole spectrum, as in fuzzy logic, may be more appropriate.

The false dilemma fallacy refers to misuse of the or operator. For another misuse of "or", see the false choice fallacy. For misuse of the and operator, see package-deal fallacy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dichotomy

[BuddyYoung]

34. "Take away conpirators plotting and you'd have no plays at all"

Take away rightwingers and you'd have a lot fewer conspirators.

[mhatrw]

38. So, on the basis of this description, would you advise us

to disbelieve any and all past, current and potential future theories that suggest any planned or directed malfeasance on the part of our richest and most powerful elite class?

If so, please explain to us who will most benefit from our obediently "rational" self-censorship.

[mirandapriestly]

17. "911 myths"

is exactly what the article is talking about in terms of articles that use straw men, etc..talk about reading comprehension!

[mhatrw]

36. I fail to understand what motivates this sort of post.

Do you approve of the way that the "9/11 Changes Everything" meme has been used to strip away our civil rights, put us in a state on never-ending warfare, and alienate us from the rest of the world?

If not, what is your motivation for taking time out of your busy day to criticize any discussion that casts doubt on the basis of this highly destructive meme? Why do you strive to preserve the "Conspiracy of 19 + OBL" meme from all doubt?

[BuddyYoung]

37. Excellent. Let's hear all OCT'ers answer that important question. nt

nt

[mirandapriestly]

10. Very nice article, several quotes I liked

"Self-proclaimed debunkers pull out every trick in the book to discredit the now flourishing "9-11 Truth movement"; pointing out the most improbable theories as though they were representative (straw men), pointing out the unrelated UFO believers who may also believe them, all in an attempt to portray "idiocy by association" and to make a soup so thick with the stench of lunacy, that anyone who dares tread in it is sullied by association. "

Compare this article to that "cartoon" thread with no author's signature because it was probably not a real author. They don't even notice things like that. That comic was a good example of the above

9-11 skeptics -
"They're someone looking for the laws of cause and effect, the fit between square peg and square hole, the connectible dots, to justify a narrative which makes more sense to them than something that doesn't make sense to them"
Well said, and why do people want to stop others from asking questions? "Qui bono?" is the question many of us asked initially, which is what is done in any crime and the beneficiaries were The B* administration whose ratings went from the 30's to the 90's overnight and who soon after had some outrageous legislation pushed through (Patriot Act & unjustified war), defense contractors & risk security companies also are profiting handsomely (see Debug thread) and a military -industrial economy has been created just as was warned by Ike. The politicians make a favorable climate for these corporations, then get lucrative positions with them when they leave office.

[HamdenRice]

24. Best article I've read on 9/11 in ages!

Note how this thread was hijacked into discussing certain trivial issues, however.

[BuddyYoung]

26. Which issues ("trivial") are you referring to? Thanks. nt

nt

[petgoat]

30. Sal's credibility nt

[icymist]

35. How about sanity!

Anybody can master the art of 'cut and paste' the dictionary, but to use that as your discussion is the equivalence of sticking your fingers into your ears and yelling "la,la,la,la,"!

[pberq]

27. Thanks, icymist. great article!