Original post by young_gunsHey folks,
There was a technical issue and the previous thread disappeared (not binned in moderation, the mods are not sure what happened to it). Here it is again
I'm interested to know what drives the conspiracy theory mindset, and why people are inclined to believe such nonsense? Are they credulous, even stupid? Or are there deeper psychological or cultural factors at play?
A few examples. One is the ridiculous claims about the Rothschild family. There is no doubt the Rothschild family, along with the Barings and Coutts families, exercised disproportionate power and influence in the 19th century. Before there were well-managed, state-owned/controlled central banks, these families acted as a kind of private International Monetary Fund, who often bailed out governments.
But by the mid-20th century, their power was had waned. The Bank of England was nationalised by the Labour Party in 1945 and assumed a much more active role in financial markets. The Austrian Rothschilds had their wealth stolen by their Nazis and didn't manage to get much back after the war. And the French Rothschilds' firm nationalised by the French state in the early 1980s. There's no doubt that they're a wealthy family, worth a few billion pounds. But beyond that, it's all just idle and baseless speculation unsupported by facts.
The 7/7 attack is another example. Conspiracy theorists tend to claim that these young men were actually working for the Security Services and thought they were taking part in a terrorism drill. This is fatuous, to say the least. Shehzad Tanweer and Mohamed Siddique Khan recorded videos explaining why they were going to be suicide bombers, and this video was released by Al-Qaeda shortly after the 7/7 bombings. This conspiracy would also require the existence of a cell within the Security Services who were undertaking these false flag operations, and who were completely unknown to anyone else working in the intelligence community.
Finally, there were bizarre claims that the Bali Bombings in 2002 (which many Brits tend to forget about, but 27 British citizens died in the attack, along with 88 Australians killed and a total of 202 killed overall) must have been an Israeli tactical nuke because the blast was so powerful, and that a potassium chlorate bomb (which was the blast material) was incapable of causing the kind of damage seen. With some very cursory research, I found out that the way the bomb was put together (2200lbs of chlorate in 12 plastic cabinets, with aluminum powder, TNT boosters linked with PETN detcord and RDX-electric detonators) actually caused a thermobaric effect, and the amount of explosive (equivalent to two Mk 84 bombs) was more than sufficient to cause the blast damage and burns caused.
Why do people believe this stuff? I've never met a well-educated, successful person who subscribes to this stuff; it always seems to be embittered, less educated people, often bigoted or highly religious. It's also strange to me that many Islamists manage to hold the two contradictory thoughts that they both support bombings/attacks on the West, but believe that when they do happen it must have been a CIA/MI6/Mossad conspiracy.
Most conspiracy theories fall apart with even cursory research, and the theorists appear to take any challenge to their account of events to be proof that you too are part of the conspiracy / a "government shill". Where there are inconsistencies or seeming mistakes in the government account of events, they don't take that to mean the government made a mistake, or was perhaps incompetent or even might be holding back information for self-serving reasons, they take it to mean the government must have been directly involved.
Conspiracy theories, and the general attitude of conspiracism, of overly-cynical attitudes to public service and our democratic system (including left-wing/Islamist conspiracism that asserts Western governments actions are driven by a desire to attack Islam or oppress the inhabitants of the Mid-East), is corrosive to the body politic, and these theories should be challenged.