Mister Agenda on Conspiracy Theories

I like to send articles to my old blogging partner Mister Agenda for his perusal and response. Every so often, he writes replies that I find very insightful and worthy of posting and/or sharing. This is one of those responses:

If it's not a secret, it's not a conspiracy. And almost all conspiracy theorists do stop at speculation. Worse, now that they have a conclusion, they work backwards to find evidence that fits it. This method pretty much guarantees the only way they will uncover an actual conspiracy will be by accident or just because with so many theories haphazardly proposed, some may actually turn out to be correct. When the steel companies lobby for steel tariffs, it is not an example of conspiracy, it is an example of lobbying. Systematic secret back-room payoffs to congress critters would constitute conspiracy, and it wouldn't surprise me if someone followed the evidence to expose such, but it will more likely be a report than a conspiracy theorist...and that's saying a lot, given the quality of investigative reporting these days.

There is no government conspiracy to lead people to be skeptical, I almost wish there were. Evidence indicates that nearly half of Americans are gullible sheep who will swallow any half-way plausible conspiracy theory that fits their preconceptions. Democrats are likely to think 9/11 was an inside job, Republicans are likely to believe Obama is a stealth Muslim born in Africa.

FEMA death camps, vaccinations causing autism, these are the theories I hear, they're easily refuted, and the people who hold them are immune to evidence. Show them the 'FEMA death camp' is a Google Map of a N. Korean prison camp, and they won't consider the possibility that they're wrong.

Critical theories don't dismiss the possibility of conspiracies. It's the likelihood of Conspiracies which are large-scale and require hundreds of people to maintain an iron cloak of secrecy over a long period of time to work that can be dismissed unless the evidence is proportional to the claim. I used to work for the NSA, supposedly our most secret organization, and it's a sieve compared to what would be required to pull off the typical 'big C' Conspiracy.

Rothbard wasn't really wrong, as he is using an idiosyncratic definition of conspiracy that apparently means 'openly and publicly campaigning for what you want'.

Thanks for giving me something interesting to chew on this morning, I usually am so much in agreement that I don't have much to add to your offerings.



ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Posted in: