Skeptic Project

This one has been brewing for a long time and contains many of my thoughts over the past few months about how the world of conspiracy theories is changing, and how we--debunkers--may not be changing with it.

http://muertos.blog.com/2012/02/18/the-conspiracy-world-is-changing-are-you-ready-for-it/

This is a much more philosophical and broad-brush piece than I often do, but this is where my thoughts have been going lately.

Enjoy.

I have not dealt with CT's as long as Muertos, so this is a very eye opening piece that seems to flow in a chronological order as to help one understand a perspective as to CT material/mantra throughout the years. Besides understanding CT material from a chronological perspective I find this blog post makes a subtle but very important inference that debunking conspiracy theory's is no longer enough. Conspiracy theories are no longer a means to a end in themselves, but it's more that conspiracy theories are used as one of many ideological tools that are used to reinforce that the world is a bad place and that if no one does anything then nothing changes but if you adopt this ideology then you too can change the world (Just reading this bit over, sounds much like a religion or a cult). I think Muertos says it best when he says "As conspiracy theories become increasingly a means to an end rather than the end itself, the bottom line for believers in them is whether the goal the conspiracy theories are advancing is a desirable one or not.".

There was a lot of CT information I never really knew before until I read this blog. For instance I never knew that 9/11 CT belief had a period where it was pretty much dying out until the Zeitgeist Movement rekindled life back into it; Which is interesting to me because I never knew anything about 9/11, Alex Jones, chemtrails until I came across TZM. It also gives me a better understanding and appreciation for why Edward wrote the most elaborate debunk of the Zeitgeist film on the internet and why Peter Joseph Merola/TZM members responded to the Skeptic Project site in the manner they did as well as why TVP broke away from TZM.

In response to the end of your blog post about how CT debunking may be futile nowadays, I am indifferent about it. I'm indifferent because I have witnessed people like Brenton (not to sure about this person), or Vasper who have made leaps and bounds away from not just CT mantra but also as one could say is a disbeliever in the ultimate goal of TZM. Then again for them to realize that TZM is really messed up, TZM had to make a lot of blunders before Vasper or Brenton could really snap out of it and really digest and interpret TZM critics material more clearly.

When reading through Edwards 9/11 debunk on SP (which was a long time ago) and a few other things he wrote on SP I can't remember where I saw it (maybe someone will know what I'm talking about and put up a link) but Edward said something that sort of stuck out to me to this day about CT's. Edward basically said something of the nature that no one should really attempt to change a CT's mind at all, the intent is to at best post information debunking the CT and then if needed it's up to the person debunking a CT if they really want to have dialogue with a CTer to at least give them another perspective. I think Edwards perspective as a whole is a good one because he's not even attempting to change CTer's ideology but merely trying to post information as to why it's not logical, or just flat out not right in the first place (which makes CT's very upset). Edwards thinking is basically to let CT's ride out the CT belief, don't try to show a CT a chockablock of debunking information through direct dialogue (as CT's do with us); rather if one must use direct dialogue keep it short and sweet, and link to a website that if the CT wants to read they can see a chockablock filled site of debunking material towards there CT ideology.

I don't think debunking a CT is outdated I just think as the CT's and as we say there end goal/s get more elaborate the debunks need to become more elaborate in a academic sense as well. I think CT's nowadays for example TZM use CT's as fuel to gain members but use things like a RBE (or a RBEM as the call it) as a sort of a Utopian/economic/political ideology that can't really be debunked. The fact that a RBE is so vague, and no one including the maker of the term really knows what a RBE really is makes a RBE debunk proof in a sense, yet just because it is debunked proof does not mean it doesn't have obvious flaws in it.

As cyborgjesus knows I have been working on RBE criteria list. Where I will review all material where Fresco and Roxanne talk about a RBE and then eventually compile that information into a criteria list. The criteria list in short will be a way to more easily see all in one shot what exactly is a RBE as well as help TVP or TZM members understand as well as possibly implement their ideology into reality. The other side of the coin is by making this criteria list my hope is that more academics take a look at this list and are more easily able to compare and contrast a RBE to communism or socialism, or be able to critique, and criticize etc... Basically puts the RBE economic ideology more under the scope in a academic light. In the bigger scheme of things this is a attempt to get more elaborate with CT's ideology or there end goal. This may take me awhile to do but I'm in no hurry, I'm thinking I'll have something up on SP towards springtime (idea/inspiration for this is thanks to Muertos for showing us the cult criteria list).


Reference
More details on the RBE criteria list.
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/forum/5262/tvp-faq-this-coming-sunday-3/#reply-3abad595

Again nice blog. Speaking about CT's mentality, I think it's hard for people in general to ditch a ideology they are to emotionally involved with, therefore any logic and reason that opposes there ideology gets automatically rejected do to there emotional involvement in the cause. This emotional attachment allows CT's nowadays to be able to accept obvious flaws in there CT belief system because the ends justify the means. Clearly this thinking isn't based on logic, but more of a combo of emotional and possibly self-identity issues that could have quite possibly have stemmed way before they ever bought into a CT ideology.

The CT ideology they buy into in a way is more of a crutch, excuse, or a justification as to who they are. Most CT's are on the fringes of society and would be labeled as "have-nots" which is defined as "an individual or group that is without wealth, social position, or other material benefits". The have-nots of society simply find it easier to blame others for there misfortunes instead of pointing the finger upon themselves. People like Peter Joseph, Neil Kiernan Stephenson aka VTV (big time offender, also has big man boobies ( . ) ( . )), Fresco, Roxanne among others are very good examples of have-nots. Instead of blaming themselves they point to society as for the reason why they were never able to make it. In a way have-nots have developed a group that has direct appeal towards other have-nots to join. Have-not groups for the most part do nothing constructive, there pretty much the floating turd in the toilet at best with a conspiratorial fueled mindset.