I agree that the term conspiracy has a terrible social stigma connected to it. Most serious researchers in the field make a point of saying
that they are NOT conspiracy theorists. Here’s a brief explanation of why the researcher on the left hate “conspiracy theories”.
Conspiracy theories may or may not identify real coteries with real influence. Conspiracy theories:
(a) Claim that a particular group acted outside usual norms in a rogue and generally secretive fashion.
(b) Disregard the structural features of institutions.
www.zmag.org...
“Conspiracy Theorists on the left prefer to research Institutional Theories, which
they feel could actually induced permanent social changes.
I tend to agree with this assessment. Often “conspiracies” are isolated. They are regarded as “exceptions”. This is more convenient than
actually looking at the institutions which made the conspiracies possible in the first place. (pseudo-Government, Corporations)
As an example look at the current Stock Market bubble, despite the numerous telling signs such as the recent tech crash followed by huge frauds like
Enron etc. The attention is mainly focused on poor accounting practices and these companies are “isolated” and considered to be “rogue”.
In a similar way I think the word globalization is synonymous with the term NWO. But again serious academics usually shy from the term
NWO because of the ambiguous definition of the term.
|