Can Conspiracy theories be politically motivated?

In another thread I wondered if Conspiracy theories were a substitute for political involvement my conclusion was that it in the case I was examining the answer was yes.

The people promoting the theory seem to be saying that any political involvement was futile.

But it has become clear that some people, some of the most fervent peddlers of these theories may have political motives, a political agenda.

**

While such people were claiming that voting for anyone was futile and that political involvement useless, these people were even less relevant, politically, than those very small packets of sad extremists, since they at least call for revolution.

But it is becoming clear that for some at least this isn’t the case, that they might just have a political motive for pushing these theories after all.

You see if the theories helped no political party or group that was one thing but if they favoured a political party or group then that is something else.

It raises questions about the motives of those spreading such damaging rumours about their opponents?

I mean seen as politically motivated smear campaigns rather than ‘history’ or ‘fact’ these theories do fit in remarkably well with other such campaigns.

At first they attack the major political parties as being both the same, something many people believe is true. This is something I don’t find surprising since they are basically both right wing in nature and therefore funded by many of the same interest groups, but the Conspiracy theory claims this is because they are under the control of ‘conspirators’.

They then go on to say that any left wing political group or party are knowingly or not working for the ‘fascist’ conspirators. This is backed up by a long and complicated plot that claims the right wing conspirators virtually invented the whole idea of left wing political thought as a means to promote their own ends.

This is rather clever in that it seems to be trying to convince people that might become involved in left wing politics that if they did so they would be working for the very forces they thought they were opposing.

**

At first I thought that there was going to be no saviour in this story, but it now becomes clear that for at least some of these evangelical conspiracy theorists, there is a way out of the conspirators clutches and they way to do it is to vote for and support certain right wing political parties and groups.

The thing is that self-same right wing groups are promoting policies that would seem to enhance the power and wealth of the very people who are meant to be behind the so called conspiracy.

Now if I was a conspiracy theorist, but I’m not, I would find that fact rather suspicious??

 

Occasionally they might be politically motivated, as in the cases of Joe McCarthy or Lyndon LaRouche.

Most of the time, they're just a superstition that people believe because it's more "interesting" to believe in a world of illuminati than to believe in a world of politicians and business executives. They draw their conclusions, then look for evidence, just like the peddlers of any other dogmatic religion.

For the vast majority of conspiracy theorists (including most or all of the ones on this board), finding a solution to the problem of an illuminati-controlled world is secondary, even irrelevant. What motivates them is the conspiracy itself.

 

I think some people gravitate too much towards labels. I also find it peculiar that some people try to make things more confusing than they really are by going off tangent and asking a bunch of questions that divert attention from previous arguments in which they cannot support.

I don't remember anyone saying that voting is futile. Voting within the two-party system, in my opinion, is futile. Even you acknowledged this, Balbus.

So what is your major malfunction?

I notice with Balbus that instead of focusing on and debating the differing political ideologies, he focuses on the people whose political ideologies differ from his, attempting to discredit them while dodging the topics in which he has no argument for. He will just keep repeating the same chorus line over and over again.

I find that all too often people who criticise others as being "conspiracy theorists" have never done any reading into these matters themselves. Because of their superiority complex and arrogant nature, they feel as though they always have to be right, even when they have no evidence to support or refute an argument. They never want to take the time to either understand the other side of the story or debate their side of the story, they only want to criticise and flaunt their ego because it builds them up.

 

Conspiracy theory is NOT a political ideology. It is a superstition/religion.

Ideologically I'm probably closer to you than I am to Balbus. But he's a hell of a lot more rational than you are.

 

Yeah, but you see, this is YOUR opinion. Opinions are like assholes in that everyone has one.

You are wrong to think that your opinions reign over everyone elses that you might happen to disagree with.

There are people in these forums who happen to agree with what I say, because instead of always thinking they're right, they have taken the time to do some of their own research and form their own opinions. I never ask people to blindly go along with what I say. I encourage people to do their own research, and if they still disagree with me, that's fine. The thing is, at least they took the time to look at the other side of the story, instead of only their own.

 

But see, that's the thing. You DON'T do your own research. You cut-and-paste articles from Alex Jones or wherever else, accepting what they say as gospel. And if one article is proven to be blatantly false, you retreat by saying that you "don't know if it's true or not," but then continue to treat every other article from that source as gospel.

 

Once again Kandahar, you are wrong wrong wrong. Finding solutions and alternatives to the status quo is what we are representing. It is people like YOURSELF who are not interested in finding solutions. Your interest is in preserving the status quo of corporate conformity...ADMIT IT.

Yet again, your track record for being wrong is at an astounding 1000 percent! You accuse Pressed Rat of not doing any research (as if you peek in through his window at night) and then present your own argument as undeniable, common-knowledge fact. You are a complete and total idiot. As much as Balbus irritates me with his endless cycle of arguing, at least he has an intelligent way of presenting his opinions. YOU DO NOT. I would honestly rather spend a day having a couple beers with Balbus than I would with you, and I honestly mean that. At least his opinions make sense (even though they are consistently inaccurate).

 

You might be interested in finding solutions to "real" problems, but you don't even make an effort to find a solution to a New World Order because you know that that idea is bullshit even if you won't admit it.

How is switching the world over to socialism or supporting ELF terrorists going to make the illuminati disappear, Revo?

I'm interested in improving the world economy so that as many people as possible have a good standard of living. The best way of doing that happens to be by promoting capitalism and investing in corporations.

 

"How is switching the world over to socialism or supporting ELF terrorists going to make the illuminati disappear, Revo?"

When did I ever say that, you stupid fuck? I'm not a socialist, my beliefs lean toward anarchism, which is quite different. And I don't support the methods and tactics of ELF...I only support their ultimate goals. Again, shut your ugly face.

 

Better luck next time. :sunglasse

 

Dude, you have NO counter-argument. You are no match for me, believe me on that. I will outwit your argument at every turn and you know this. So seriously, just stop.

 

Dude, man, if you expect a counter-argument, you'll need to put up a better argument than "Shut your ugly face." Dude.

I love how every time you know you're beat, you beg the other person to stop arguing because you think they've suffered enough. How thoughtful of you!

 

Rat

To me the two major parties in the US are both right wing and that I therefore don’t agree with their political ideology, you on the other hand claim that these parties shouldn’t be vote for, because they are controlled by shadowy conspirators.

In fact your attacks on other political groups (other than your own) seem all to be based on their control or corruption by these very same conspirators.

It seems that to you these conspirators are so bad, so corrupt that they must seem evil in your eyes, so what you are saying in effect is that anyone that votes for any political group other than your own is voting for evil.


To me that is deeply suspicious.

**

When I asked you -

Do you believe that the ‘secret conspirators’ could control any political party or movement?

You replied –

Sure, they could have control over anything they wanted to.

I naturally took this to mean that you believed that, in the end, voting for any political party was futile? I mean if someone believes that a political party, group or movement could easily fall to the power these conspirators what would be the point in voting? Are you now saying that only voting for the major parties is futile and that any other political group is OK?


Or are you saying that by some seeming miracle the political groups that you support are the only one that have been and are able to withstand the conspirators power and if so why?

**

The more I have come to think about it the more this so called ‘conspiracy theory’ has clearly all the haul marks of a classic smear campaign.

The thing is that the very people that are meant to be part of this ‘evil’ conspiracy are the very same people that would actually benefit from more libertarian policies being enacted in the US. You begin to wonder who is fooling who?

 

Again Kandahar, you are no match for me. You never beat any of my arguments, and you never will. When I say things like "shut your face", it's because I view you as a lost cause. Worthless. A nobody. A nothing. A zero. And that's exactly what you are and will probably always be...even when you're locked up in the Patriot Act-enforced concentration camp (if it ever gets that far) for saying Bush "could have done something slightly different".

You sad sad sad little man. If I didn't hate you so much, I'd feel sorry for you.

 

Oh wow, I didn't even read this part! See, you just admitted to being a corporate whore (I already knew it, but with that one sentence alone...you just admitted it).

Any little tiny tidbit of respect I had for you just vanished. Even if you won't admit it, you ARE a Bush supporter. You support the Republican agenda. Your parents should be rotting in hell for conceiving a worthless piece of garbage like youself. (that was a horrible thing to say that deep down I don't really mean...but damnit, I despise you) I despise you most of all for not admitting to being a Republican. You are a weasel.

 

Hmm...If I was a Republican I think I'd know. I doubt I'd have voted for John Kerry if I was a Republican. Furthermore, I doubt I'll be voting Republican any time in the near future since I support a free market (the GOP has become even more authoritarian than the Democrats in terms of government regulation).

Whatever. "Republican" in this case doesn't even refer to a political party; it's just a name you throw around to make yourself feel better about losing arguments.

 

What difference would it make if you voted for Kerry or Bush? They're both the same! They are both empty suits who are shills for the big corporations and banks. They might as well both call themselves Republicans. Stop acting like Kerry would be any different than his Skull & Bones cousin, G.W., if he was elected.

 

I disagree. I find both parties to be left-wing, as both sides seem to favor big government and a trend towards socialism.

I actually find the current president, who is a "Republican," to be more to the left of the last president, who is a Democrat. If you don't agree with me, just compare their spending records.

I believe that people shouldn't vote for either of these parties because they are both essentially the same. And yes, they're controlled by the same corporate interests. They serve the same elites. There are many reasons to not vote Democrat or Republican.

Yes. And???

There are other third-parties to vote for besides the Libertarian Party. There is the Green Party, the Constitution Party, the Reform Party, the Socialist Party, etc..

Of course none of these parties stand a chance of winning, because they're not controlled by the same big-money interests as the two predominant parties.

Why?

**

Well, the elite interests want nothing to do with the third parties because they already have the majority of the people hoodwinked under their spell, buying into the Dem/Rep paradigm.

In a way, voting IS futile, since the party that wins is the party that has the most money backing it. The voters mean little. This doesn't mean I don't vote, though, because I do believe in my constitutional right to vote, as corrupt as the system may be.

No, you are just being dense.

**

A smear campaign against who? The economic-elite? The big corporations?

Don't you understand that socialism is nothing more than the ILLUSION of opposing capitalism, when it is also a system devised by the big banks, to detract wealth and power from the common man and place it into the corrupt hands of those in power, who have the power to do with it whatever they see fit, regardless of the law?

Keep on ignoring the facts. Keep on ignoring the fact that YOUR system does far more to benefit the elite power structure than mine.

 

I'm not saying that Kerry would be a great president, because he wouldn't be. But he would be better than the current occupant of the White House, for the simple reason that he is less likely to pursue a cowboy foreign policy and more likely to keep the state out of personal matters. On economic issues, both Kerry and Bush are just awful, although the latter is slightly worse than the former.

 

Interesting points.
At the risk of having a net thrown over me I tend to agree with Matt.

I agree that Bush is more leftist in terms of big government, but he swings to the other extreme when it comes to personal freedoms, religious extremism etc.
I also agree that Kerry wouldn't have been much better than Bush, but he would have been better. One big difference is the respective stances on environmentalism. bush has been systematically trashing all the existing environmental legislation, while paving the way for his big business buddies to ravage what's left. Yes, I know Kerry wouldn't have saved the world or anything, but perhaps it wouldn't have been quite so bad.

I don't think things would have been any different in terms of Iraq / foregn policy.

I sometimes like to poke fun at conspiracy theory, but I'm glad people do take the time to research it. I believe that questioning our leaders and demanding accountability is a very patriotic pursuit. (not a very popular opinion in these Orwellian times)

I also believe that our government is extremely corrupt and that history has taught us that there is usually much more going on than meets the eyes. I always think of that line from "The Usual Suspects" where Spacy says "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist".