Why Do Americans Embrace Conspiracy Theories?

You're making perfectly good sene to me. All we're asking for is "disclosure," we don't like the idea that our leaders are hiding anything from us. Least of all, we dispise the idea that they are knowingly doing stuff that is good for them and bad for us. We'd like to trust, but they've given us too many reasons to NOT trust.

I have to admit it was once a secret that I embraced CT. It was the family shame when I would spout off to the conservatives about important issues that were forthcoming.
After so many years of listening to my views and watching so much of it unfold before their eyes, it is kind of like you say Justin, 'almost ok' now to see things coming down the pike and having the power to do something about it.
I do not see any major changes in the people that get out there and vote, they are just now starting to come around because it is becoming trendy to do so.
I am not talking about people here or of like mind, but the general population of ordinary folk.

Hello again, antar. At the risk of sounding academic, I think that there's a tendency among many to reach for the wrong label when they talk about government, cynicism, and their ability to predict what comes next. Is it really Conspiracy Theory, or is it political awareness? I say it's political awareness.

"Conspiracy Theory" has become a life style, and its used as a label to describe cynicalistic unconventional thinking. "Just because you KNOW they're out to get you doesn't mean that you're paranoid." In some cases, people want to believe some of thesethings so very much that their desire is tranformed in to an enabling mechanism. For a few, it becomes a quasi-religious 'faith.'

Like most, I'm just talking about what I've actually seen, or what I can deduce from the publicly available information at hand. I've always been the black sheep in my family. First, it was because I was legally blind. thyen ti was because I wouldn't conform to some of my family's preferred thinking. Then, I went to college. Now, my sin is that I'm a writer. They see me as a dillitente. A stay-at-home do-nothing. In their blue collar view of the world, Authors are not worth much.

I don't live the Conspiracy Theory life style, though I do write in the genre. The world at large knows me as a struggling writer of political fiction. Very few people in the MSM had made the connection that I'm "that guy." Eventually, that will come. Some day, somebody will put two and two together, and it'll be "your THAT Justin Oldham?" I'm ready for it. I haven't written anything that I'm ashamed of. I can and do explain everything that anybody can find online about me.

We're not wrong for questioning what goes on in our government. We pay the taxes. It's ours, we own it. We might be making payments on it, but it is really ours and we're not out of line for questioning what it does. That's one of the many American virtues that we should struggle to keep. The idea that "they serve us" is right there in the spirit of our Constitution. It's woven in to our traditions, and it's a thread that the politicos would love to find and cut.

They serve us, or we WILL serve them. They'll make sure of that.

Some times, I find a news items that can make more than one point. The following bit of official government business should serve as one more example which demonstrates "Why" Americans mistrust government.


-------------------------------
The following news item is take from the official web site of The House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform.

Thursday, June 21, 2007
Administration Oversight

Vice President Exempts His Office from the Requirements for Protecting Classified Information

The Oversight Committee has learned that over the objections of the National Archives, Vice President Cheney exempted his office from the presidential order that establishes government-wide procedures for safeguarding classified national security information. The Vice President asserts that his office is not an “entity within the executive branch.”

As described in a letter from Chairman Waxman to the Vice President, the National Archives protested the Vice President's position in letters written in June 2006 and August 2006. When these letters were ignored, the National Archives wrote to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in January 2007 to seek a resolution of the impasse. The Vice President's staff responded by seeking to abolish the agency within the Archives that is responsible for implementing the President's executive order.

In his letter to the Vice President, Chairman Waxman writes: "I question both the legality and wisdom of your actions. ... [I]t would appear particularly irresponsible to give an office with your history of security breaches an exemption from the safeguards that apply to all other executive branch officials."

A fact sheet prepared by Chairman Waxman describes other instances in which the Vice President's office has sought to avoid oversight and accountability.

Documents referenced from this web source:

Committee Chairman's letter to the Vice President

Letter from the National Archive to the Attorney General

Second letter from the National Archive's to the Vice President's office

First letter from the National Archives to the Vice President's office

Fact Sheet on the Vice President's Efforts to avoid Oversight and Accountability

--------------------------------
Aside from the fact that this is an obvious move to keep secrets, you're also seeing a serious attempt to establish a new rule which would allow future Federal officials to NOT answer FOIA requests, or even to admit what they may or may not have on the official record.

Why do we embrace conspiracy theiories?

Actually Americans are addicted to the truth. To counteract this instinct, governments labeled them conspiracy theorists, as if to say nothing would ever be proven. IMO, This tactic is meant to verbally belittle anyone who tries to seek to much truth. It works pretty good too. When the average American hears the phrase "conspiracy theory", they are already breaking out the tinfoil hats and ready to laugh. But, when the average American is asked a simple and straightforward question based on facts, they may end up questioning their own "truths" in the end.

I think that's a fair analysis. I never intended to be here, doing what I am doing now. If a certain incident had not taken place, I could still be in civil service. It's altogether possible that I may not have ever become a writer. I'm not ashamed to admit that I had some of the prejudices you describe. Now that I know differently, I see things differently. I can still imagine what my life would have been like if I had NOT written that first book tha sent me down this path, but I'm glad that I did.

Justin,

You make a good point about having some prejudices that shape your views. Your one of the few that I've every seen openly admit to it though. The truth of the matter is that we ALL have them. Weather we admit it or not, ever human is shaped by their experiences and their upbringing from home. No one is born with oppinion, they are shaped by life experiences that we have. What matters is what we choose to do with thoes oppinions and beliefes!

Tim

I have been told by more than a few thait I don't sound like what they imagine a Conspiracy Master to be. A "Master of Conspiracy" would know a lot about all conspiracies. A Conspiracy Master knows a lot about their chisen field of interest. UFO's are not my thing, so I don't go there. Government is my thing so, I DO go there.

Some of the more popular conspiracy theorists have chosen to make a living by catering all of the conspiracy theories in one form or another. I have no interest in being that commercial. My choice of words may not be very strident, fierce, or 'hot' but they all originate from "my voice." this is me talking to you. Being genuine has to count for something. I know that there is a certain amount of showmanship that goes in to the Conspiracy Theorist gig, but I'm only willing to do just so much flash and dazzle.

Truth really is stranger than fiction. This government stuff may be boring as heck to most people, but that's part of what "they" count on. It's not as snappy as a cow mutilation or an alien abduction or even a 9/11 hoax, but is the one dark project that I have seen with my own two eyes. I'll be here for as long as circumstances permit. It'll just be me talking to anyone who dares to click on the links that bring them to this forum. I'll tell you what I've learned, and show you my homework. It'll be up to you to draw your own conclusions.

Tha "Dark" conspiracies are the government ones. I think aliens, ghosts, trash from McDonalds on the moon, that is all trivial to me.

Think we'll ever get the "truth"? Did we ever have the truth? Maybe we never ever had it- things seemed just more "normal" before, more chewable and swallable, but now, not even a drink of water can get me to swallow these lies.

Or maybe we're getting the truth for the first time?

In regards to governmetn secrets, especially those tied to centralized power, I do think we're getting more of the truth because the actual facts of the thing are becoming harder to hide. We've reached that point when our elected officials make very little effort to hide what they're doing to us.

I'm doing my part to call attention to this conspiracy of centralized power, but I don't actually think we'll stop it. I am, however, confident that when they push it too far, the system will break and we'll have a chance to step in and pick up the pieces. It may come down to a revolt, but I'm still thinking that we can get past that and move on to better things.

I'd like to show you the following news item that demonstrates--again--that Americans are not wrong to fear their government.

June 21, 2007 9:39 p.m. PT

Cheney: Office not part of executive branch

Assertion made as part of data battle

By JULIA MALONE
COX NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON -- Dick Cheney, who has wielded extraordinary executive power as he transformed the image of the vice presidency, is asserting that his office is not actually part of the executive branch.

In a simmering dispute with the National Archives that heated up Thursday, Cheney has long maintained that he does not have to comply with an executive order on safeguarding classified information because, in fact, his office is part of the legislature.

Further, Cheney's office tried to abolish the oversight agency involved, according to a Democratic congressman.

Cheney, whose single constitutional duty is to serve as president of the Senate, holds that the vice president's office is not an "entity within the executive branch" and therefore not subject to annual reporting or periodic on-site inspections under the 1995 executive order, which was updated four years ago by President Bush.

The vice president has been refusing to cooperate with the National Archives office assigned to oversee the handling of classified data since 2003.

"We are confident that we are conducting the office properly under the law," vice presidential spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said.

Democrats, to be sure, took the opposite view. House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, in a letter posted on the Internet Thursday, told Cheney it was "irresponsible" to reject security oversight.

"Your office may have the worst record in the executive branch for safeguarding classified information," the California Democrat wrote.

He cited the conviction of former top Cheney aide Lewis "Scooter" Libby for lying in the investigation into who leaked the identity of a CIA operative.

Waxman said Cheney's office, in a move that "could be construed as retaliation," had tried to abolish the Information Security Oversight Office, the division of the National Archives set up to enforce safeguards for classified information in executive agencies.

Waxman said the oversight office head, William Leonard, told congressional investigators that the vice president's staff had not succeeded.

The National Archives appealed its case for oversight of Cheney's classified information practices to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales last January. Gonzales has not responded.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., when asked about Cheney's claim to be part of the legislative branch, quipped: "I always thought that he was president of this administration."

Constitutional experts were startled at the notion that the vice presidency isn't in the executive branch.

"The vice president is saying he doesn't have to follow the orders of the president," said Garrett Epps, a law professor at the University of Oregon. "That's a very interesting proposition."

Epps said the lines have not been drawn that clearly: "The vice president spans, in some ways, the branches of government."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino brushed off questions about what branch of the government the vice president resides in, saying she doesn't know enough about the issue.

Susan Low Bloch, a constitutional professor at Georgetown University Law Center, called Cheney's position a "novel claim." Although most people think of vice presidents as executive officials, she added that it's really "a bit of a hybrid" role.

As vice president, Cheney receives his paycheck from the U.S. Senate, which also pays the salaries of much of his staff. However, he also sits in Cabinet meetings and has an office at the White House.

Cheney's lawyers have used his role as adviser to the president to fend off a lawsuit seeking the names of energy executives who advised him on an energy task force.

Paul Orfanedes, who heads litigation for Judicial Watch, a non-partisan group that joined in the lawsuit, said the vice president's claim "seems most disingenuous."

------------------------------

There is nothing even just a little bit vague about what's going on here. this is a deliberate move on the part of an elected leader to set himself apart from the legal system that authorizes his actions.

Justin, once again you've tapped into many interesting issues.

As an Australian i know that's it's not just an issue of Americans embracing conspiracy theories, i personally think it stems from human nature.

I didn't look into this site because i was interested in conspiracy theories, or i had some theories up my sleeve, i went searching because my human instinct told me that something was up.

I believe there are two sorts of conspiracy theorists, both based on human nature.

Ones that like to believe in something "cool" and "trendy" like Aliens, or beasts, or the end of the world. It's human nature to want to beleive in something and be interested in creative theories that tickle the brain.

Then there are other conspiracy theorists that look into the truth because they know that something is up. This is also human nature because when humans are cornered they defend themselves.

That's why 911 was such a big hit. It didn't make sense. It's human nature to prick your ears up when the dots don't join up. It was human nature to realise that we were being attacked in some way, so we started to look into why.

That's my two cents.

Originally posted by dingleberry77
Then there are other conspiracy theorists that look into the truth because they know that something is up. This is also human nature because when humans are cornered they defend themselves.

I think I'm in that second group of Conspiracy Theorists that you mentioned. Atleast, I hope that I am.

Why Do Americans Embrace Conspiracy Theories?

Because Americans are generally a paranoid bunch and always have been. American history is riddled with such.

Because Americans are generally suspicious of power and those (ie: the government, etc.) that control it and always have been. Again, American history is riddled with such. Therefore, it is logical that people will automatically or inherently suspect those in power or the government of always lying or hiding something.

Hollywood, in its own paranoia, continues to spew out movies and television series passing off insinuations of hidden elites (ie: dark government figures--X-Files, etc), super secret societies, and unrestrained intelligence agencies with global aspirations seeking to control everyones destiny.

More can be said on this, but for what?
Those who proclaim or insist that conspiracy theorists only seek to unveil the truth are simply misguided by such ludicrous conceptions. Often times, the truth is already exposed or in front of them and because they are so deadset on finding that 'truth,' they fail to see or recognize it for what it is: the TRUTH.

BTW, Americans are not the only peeps to crave and eagerly swallow such notions that can be attributed to "embrace"-ing conspiracy theories. The French and Germans seriously come to mind here.

[edit on 26-6-2007 by Seekerof]

What you've described may apply to some people, but I'd like to think that percentage is rather small. It's true that some choose to pursue Conspiracy Theory as a life stype. For some, its a form of acting out that comes with few consequences. For others, its a way of being contrary without actually being against anything that really matters.

The majority of posters in this thread have made the case that most Americans who embrace C.T. do so because it merely validates what they've already experienced. Until you actually bump in to some of this stuff, there's no real reason to pay any attention to it. If just one single circumstance had worked out differently for me, I might not be here at all.

You are quite right to point out that lots of people around the world have an interest in Conspiracy Theory. There will always be a minority of us who take it too far. In general, I think the majority of us will continue to seek out alternative news sources while we seek to question what is going on around us.

Justin,
I always have a hard time explaining to friends that the things that are happening can be for some not so good reasons.

RFID tags may be good for tracking shipments and taking inventory.... but embedded chips in merchandise can be used to track you when you are in that store.

I bought some things at the home improvement store the other day. I paid cash and the cashier asked me for my phone number and input the number into the register before she rung up the purchase. Why do they need the phone #?

I returned a clothing purchase with receipt I paid cash for and they would not give me a refund unless I showed them my drivers license! I paid cash and they did not ask my phone # when I bought it.

We now have an electronic device that we use in my area that allows you to prepay for the tollway while driving to work. I can look into my account online and see where and at what time I went through the toll gate while traveling to or from work. I can see that in the future if someone makes it from point A to point B in 15 minutes the authorities will be able to deduce that you had to going at least 75 mph here is your ticket in the mail. I held out for as long as I could but if you dont have the device your tolls cost twice as much.

Cameras at all of the busy intersections are there to catch people running red lights..but what else can they use them for?

Anyone that wants to can tell I bought milk and bread at the store at 3:45 today and filled up my car at 5:00 at the gas station.

For the people that dont believe in conspiracy they ask why would the govt. care if you bought bread or returned a shirt?

For those that do it is just another way for big brother to track your moves on a small level while the larger scale has the Patriot Act, Cheney, 911 etc.

My question is..... in your opinion are these things all related? Are they all a small and large part of a grand schemme to enslave the population...or NO?

It's genetic.

The U.S. is the last great place for the risk takers. Those who come here are the people who are willing to stake their future on nothing more than a dream. That gene was passed to their offspring.

The thing about risk takers is they expect everyone they meet to screw them in one way or another. They constantly look into the abyss and it takes them into the heart of the unknown. Every step could be a trap, every step could be the end.

This nation was built upon fear, but that fear has taken us places we could never have imagined in a safe and secure world. We face the fear everyday and walk thru it, to a future of bolder and better idea's.

Everyone is scheming against us, but if we are to succeed, we must face those schemes and find the truth. The truth must prevail.

Those unwilling to live on the edge will never survive in our cut throat world.

This is why we believe in conspiricies.

Just my thoughts on it,

wupy

[edit on 31-7-2007 by mrwupy]

I think there is some truth towhat you say. There is inerent risk in the truth. It can cut you deeply when it works agaisnt you, or it can let you do great things. We do have an underlying expectation that our government will do bad things. Our leaders have yet to prove to us tha they are capable of doing the people's business without somehow ripping us off in the process.

We are willing to accept a certain amount of corruption. Boerge Bush might have a popular war on his hands if he hadn't lied. Bill Clinton could have messed up all the blue dresses he wanted, if he hadn't lied. George H. W. Bush might have had a second term, if he hadn't broken his word. Ronald Reagan was in effect exonerated when he came clean about Iran Contra. Jimmy Carter didn't get a secone term, but he was absolved of his failures when he took responsibility for the Iranian hostage crisis and the failed rescue mission that tarnished his good name.

I can go on, but you get the idea. Most of the time, all we want to hear is an acknowledgment. "Yeah, I did it." As you say, we expect them to do the bad thing, and all we really want is an admission. When necessary, as in the case of Richard Nixon, we'd really like them to do the right thing. when they don't, we reach for our favorite conspiracy theories...which may or may not...be correct.

Justin,

Your last post seemed geared to the post immediately after mine from mrwupy.
You might have missed my post.
I dont know if I structured my post right but I was wondering if you think that all of these "small" instances that I cited above are part of an overall "larger" plan to steal our rights and freedoms?

Originally posted by pegasus1
Justin,

Your last post seemed geared to the post immediately after mine from mrwupy.
You might have missed my post.
I dont know if I structured my post right but I was wondering if you think that all of these "small" instances that I cited above are part of an overall "larger" plan to steal our rights and freedoms?

Let's have another go at this. The technology 'intrusions' you reference are a mixed bag, to be sure. Convenience at the expense of privacy. Governments and corporations seem hell-bent on exploiting our desire for convenience for thier own gain.

I draw a very fine line of destinction/seperation between government, private sector, and technological progression. Our technical advancements are outpacing our ability to use them responsibly. As time passesses, we're in for a collision of sorts. Do politicians and corporations exploit technolgy? Yes. Do they know they are doing it? Yes.

Government should be the protector of our civil liberties. Instead, it has become the arbitrary auctioneer. Corporations influence governments to get their way, and neitehr of these two groups is willing to admit that anything is off limits.

As stated in other threads in this forum, it is my opinion that what we face is an overall "trend" that is made up of several different things, all aiming for the same general goal. The stripped down and un-varnished answer to your quesiton has to be, "yes." There is a larger trend at work designed to achieve supremacy at the expense of your rights. Politicos and finaciers find it altogether too convenient to head in the same direction for the same reasons at the same time.

A lot of things are done with the very best of intentions, but they often result in such unintended harm that we regret having done them in the first place. RFID chips and those pay and go options could be harmess...if...the government was actually on our side. Even when tehy don't actively plot against us, bureaucrats can hurt us when they don't stand up for our Constitutional mandates.

You have heard it said that evil wins when good men do nothing. It's also true that bad things happen when we don't bother to think about the consequences of our actions. As a society, we have let government get away from us. Its not our friend any more. Its our adversary. After a century or more of neglect, we are reaping what we have sewed.

We can change this trend, but it'll take another century of honest effort. Voting in reformers and pressing for accountability. In the post-industrial world, guvernments should do more that guarantee borders. They should be the sentries for their societies. When the law is not on our side, we have everything to fear from corporations who seek to exploit us...because they can.

Corporations will not reform unless the government is in a positon to make them reform. That won't happen until our government stands with us. For as long as our political and social elites choose to work against us, we are all very muchat risk of that larger plan you mentioned.