Russia....What It's Like

[Estro Felino]

The way you use that term is inconsistent.
I appears to have no meaning at all.
Clearly, you have a "wattle of cheese".

Yeah, I went there.

We Italians use that term 24 / 7.

 

[Revoltingest]

We Italians use that term 24 / 7.

That would confirm that it means either nothing or everything.

 

[Father Heathen]

I give you an example.
Honestly I have never believed in the moon hoax theories.
Astronomy doesn't interest me ...
all that involves space, spaceships...etc is so boring to me.

If there are people who write books about the moon hoax, it's the first amendment.
Those books don't affect my life.
The moon hoax doesn't affect my life.

So...if someone desperately tries to silence, belittle a conspiracy theorist...I find this incredibly suspicious.
Because that means that that conspiracy theory, (if it's proved right someday) can affect them negatively.

First, how the hell is astronomy boring?

Second, conspiracy theories surrounding the pandemic contributed to the spread of sickness and death. Disinformation can be very dangerous when people act upon it. That's why it's important to consider logic and evidence rather than blind belief.

 

[Estro Felino]

First, how the hell is astronomy boring?

Second, conspiracy theories surrounding the pandemic contributed to the spread of sickness and death. Disinformation can be very dangerous when people act upon it. That's why it's important to consider logic and evidence rather than blind belief.

All right, but how do the conspiracy theories about the CIA affect people's lives?

 

[Father Heathen]

All right, but how do the conspiracy theories about the CIA affect people's lives?

Depends on how people act upon them.

 

[Stevicus]

Have you noticed that some theories have evidence, & are useful
explanations that can be tested...while others are untestable beliefs?
They shouldn't be treated as equivalent.
Ukraine being run by Nazis, the Gay Agenda, 9/11 truthers, stolen
election cult, the Military Industrial Complex running government,
Hollywood child blood harvesting conspiracy, Jewish bankers, etc.
Those are just loopy beliefs.

Are all of these untestable beliefs? I think we'd have to look at the actual, specific propositions being put forth, not your pithy characterizations of them. But even then, they're certainly testable and falsifiable.

"Ukraine being run by Nazis": I don't know if that's the exact claim that was made, although there have been some allegations of corruption and intrigue surrounding that government and questions about how it came to power in the first place. Historically, it is well known that many Ukrainians sympathized with the Nazis, fought for the Nazis, and some even became guards at Nazi concentration camps.

"the Gay Agenda": I don't consider that to be a conspiracy theory as much as it's hate speech. If people talk about the "Black Agenda" or the "Jewish Agenda," then that's what it comes down to. Some may even talk about a "White Agenda."

"9/11 truthers": Again, it depends on the exact claims being made. Whenever I see arguments on that topic, it seems less about politics and government and more about long, technical essays on building architecture and how hot jet fuel gets when it burns. I don't really have any expertise in those fields to be able to make any informed opinion on that aspect of the event. However, I did take note of the fact that the bombings on 9/11 generated a great deal of anger and war fever among the body politic. I saw it myself - all across the country. The government ostensibly felt compelled to satisfy the people's cravings for war.

"stolen election cult": Well, there are always going to be those who are upset about election results and/or think there was some sort of fix or fraud. Even in the sports world, sometimes you might hear the losing team say "we was robbed!" Maybe a blown call by a referee or umpire. Sour grapes are sour grapes. Admittedly, the Trumpists have gone way, way overboard with this whole thing, yet even they knew they were spouting BS all along.

"Military Industrial Complex": Ahh, I see you slipped this one in among all the others. Even Eisenhower spoke of the Military Industrial Complex, although I don't think he necessarily presented them in the kind of grandiose, melodramatic way that some might see it. Reagan mentioned Iron Triangles, which is a similar concept.

"Hollywood child blood harvesting conspiracy, Jewish bankers": I don't know about any conspiracy involving the harvesting of child blood. Did someone actually allege such a thing? As for theories involving Jewish bankers, that relates more to hate speech, a similar example as "Gay Agenda" above.

 

[Stevicus]

You don't see a problem with people readily believing things that are unsubstantiated, implausible, irrational, etc.?

Critical thinking is the best approach.

It would depend on whether they're "readily believing" in them or if they're just presenting them as mere possibilities.

 

[Revoltingest]

Are all of these untestable beliefs? I think we'd have to look at the actual, specific propositions being put forth, not your pithy characterizations of them. But even then, they're certainly testable and falsifiable.

How are they better explanations for observations than alternatives?
What tests do you propose?

 

[Revoltingest]

"Military Industrial Complex": Ahh, I see you slipped this one in among all the others. Even Eisenhower spoke of the Military Industrial Complex, although I don't think he necessarily presented them in the kind of grandiose, melodramatic way that some might see it. Reagan mentioned Iron Triangles, which is a similar concept.

"Slipped" it in?
You base a conspiracy theory belief on a single statement by a politician?
That's even less substantial than conspiracy theories like the Deep State,
Adrenochrome Harvesting, & the Reptilian Overlords. The only difference
is that the MIC conspiracy theory is that the left loves it because is
demonizes the military, capitalism, & national defense.
Feels good + Non-disprovable = Belief

 

[Stevicus]

How are they better explanations for observations than alternatives?

Are they attempts at explanation or just an exploration of alternate possibilities?

What tests do you propose?

It would depend on what, exactly, we would be testing. For example, if someone had a conspiracy theory possibly involving the NSA or CIA, then it would require that the government allow access to classified information in order to be able to confirm or rule out any possible theory. If the government refuses to allow access, then that might be seen by some as deliberately withholding information and evidence from the public.

 

[Stevicus]

"Slipped" it in?
You base a conspiracy theory belief on a single statement by a politician?
That's even less substantial than conspiracy theories like the Deep State,
Adrenochrome Harvesting, & the Reptilian Overlords. The only difference
is that the MIC conspiracy theory is that the left loves it because is
demonizes the military, capitalism, & national defense.
Feels good + Non-disprovable = Belief

I don't base a conspiracy theory belief on a single statement by a politician. I just used that as an example to illustrate that it wasn't the same kind of "theory" as most of the others on your list of loopy beliefs.

 

[Revoltingest]

Are they attempts at explanation or just an exploration of alternate possibilities?



It would depend on what, exactly, we would be testing. For example, if someone had a conspiracy theory possibly involving the NSA or CIA, then it would require that the government allow access to classified information in order to be able to confirm or rule out any possible theory. If the government refuses to allow access, then that might be seen by some as deliberately withholding information and evidence from the public.

"Exploration" suggests something false, ie, that these conspiracy
theories are carefully & methodically considered. It just ain't so.

Still no tests for the conspiracy theories, eh.
Only claims that the info is kept from us, ie,
part of the conspiracy.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't base a conspiracy theory belief on a single statement by a politician. I just used that as an example to illustrate that it wasn't the same kind of "theory" as most of the others on your list of loopy beliefs.

It's just loopy, ie, it lacks evidence & explanatory power.
Every MIC conspiracy believer I've ever run into offers that
single factoid, ie, that Eisenhower believed it.
He was a politician. Don't take their claims on faith.

Of course, the reason Democrats believe in the MIC
conspiracy theory is that it gives them an excuse for
their running & voting for war mongers, ie, it's not
their fault that wrongful wars happen. They have a
faceless boogeyman to blame.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

That's the point: they can be false, they can be true.
They are theories.
But the mainstream narrative makes them a priori false.

Your deep state idea is not true. It is a conspiracy theory, it is nonsense.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

MIC

MIC?

 

[Revoltingest]

MIC?

Military Industrial Complex (conspiracy theory about it's controlling US government).

 

[Valjean]

They really aren't "theories" either, since they're
non-disprovable. But "conspiracy theory" is still
the term for beliefs about murky cabals plotting
a nefarious coup of some sort.
Note that this differs from actual conspiracies,
which have evidence, eg, Hitler & Stalin dividing
up Europe like a Thanksgiving turkey.
BTW, it's fun to note that Hitler & his buds had an
even deeper conspiracy to take Stalin's toys too.

There were plenty of communists here in the '20s and '30s. There were communist bookstores, communist holiday camps, communist parades, and communist unions. There were whole communist apartment blocks in New York city. You could buy The Daily Worker at most bookstalls.
True, there was some opposition, especially after WWII, when they had a veritable red scare.

 

[Stevicus]

"Exploration" suggests something false, ie, that these conspiracy
theories are carefully & methodically considered. It just ain't so.

How do you know?

Still no tests for the conspiracy theories, eh.
Only claims that the info is kept from us, ie,
part of the conspiracy.

Give me a quote showing me, in exact words, what is being claimed by any conspiracy theorist of your choice, and then we'll have a look. Fair enough?

 

[Stevicus]

It's just a loopy, ie, it lacks evidence & explanatory power.
Every MIC conspiracy believer I've ever run into offers that
single factoid, ie, that Eisenhower believed it.
He was a politician. Don't take their claims on faith.

Such as the government's claims about Russia or the USSR? Or the claim that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone? You mean those claims?

I don't even consider the MIC to be a "conspiracy theory," unless you're making a counter claim that the Defense Department does not exist, that there are no defense contractors, and that the government has spent $0 on national defense from 1945 to the present. Unless you're claiming that the US has no military at all, I don't see how you can criticize any statements about the military industrial complex.

Of course, the reason Democrats believe in the MIC
conspiracy theory is that it gives them an excuse for
their running & voting for war mongers, ie, it's not
their fault that wrongful wars happen. They have a
faceless boogeyman to blame.

Military–industrial complex - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military–industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together. [emphasis added]

Which statement in the above passage would you consider to be "loopy"? Is there any statement above that you can identify as factually incorrect? Is there any conspiracy theory implied in the above statement?

 

[Left Coast]

I can speak for my own country and my own people.
The 50% of them adores Russia because they still dream of the USSR...
the other 50% adores Russians because they elected Putin.

I do hope that's not true. There must be some lovers of liberal democracy left.