• zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    You’re attacking a straw man. There are groups vying for control. The question is whether or not there is one group controlling everything, and I think that’s highly unlikely.

    Way I see it, you have two competing overarching theories, “spontaneous order” and “orchestrated order”.

    I see a lot of chaos, too. Conspiracy theorists will look at something that I regard as chaos (say, the Sandy Hook massacre) and say, “Oh, yeah, that was planned (by a conspiracy).” There seems to be an unwillingness to accept that there is a lot of chaos on the world, and while some things are controlled, much of it is not.

    • dx1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Not attacking a strawman, I asked him to clarify and then talked about the context.

      “Conspiracy theorists” often look at an event that’s heavily covered by the media, that serves a perceived state interest, and investigate it further. Particularly if it receives disproportionate emphasis, like the various mass casualty events that were referenced so often they’re just referred to by dates (“9/11”, “7/7”, “Oct. 7”, etc.). Sandy Hook served a perceived state interest (popular disarmament), and people perceived “weird things about it”, so to speak, so interpretations of the event differed. Sometimes people try to explain the formation of these theories in terms of fulfillment of an emotional need (“they can’t accept this would just happen so they need to pretend someone is in control”), which is just inaccurate. They have a mental model, whether accurate in a given case or not, where there’s an antagonistic power structure of some kind orchestrating events or narratives for its own benefit, and are simply applying that lens to understand new events and narratives.

      At the end of the day, it is a fact that the U.S. government does things like this in general. You look at declassified CIA documents from the past, they are very open about overthrowing governments, manipulating public perception, and all sorts of other shady behavior. But they’re not open about them as they’re doing them. So we’re left with the difficulty of figuring it out for ourselves.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is the straw man:

        Way I see it, you have two competing overarching theories, “spontaneous order” and “orchestrated order”.

        You’re assuming that there is order and working backwards.

        Sometimes people try to explain the formation of these theories in terms of fulfillment of an emotional need (“they can’t accept this would just happen so they need to pretend someone is in control”), which is just inaccurate.

        You didn’t explain how that was inaccurate. You just said they were using a “mental model”. Why are they using that mental model, though? It’s because they need somebody to be in control.

        This has actually been studied. Sociologists have studied conspiracy theorists, and they are often people with control issues.

        • Maeve@kbin.earth
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I’d say that depends. Mkultra and Gulf of Tonkin absolutely happened. Pnac/project 2025 have likely been planned since Nixon or before.

          • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            24 hours ago

            I like how you responded almost 3 months later and the content of your response has nothing to do with what I said.