It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Paradox of the Left/Right Political Divide and the Denial of Conspiracies

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:51 PM
Has any body read this CNN article, forgive me if the link has already been posted
Deathers take over where Birthers left off

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:52 PM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Words like tin-foil hat, paranoid, anti-government, anti-Semite, Islamic sympathizer and others are often bandied about to describe those falling under the ever widening umbrella of conspiracy theorists.

Fair enough too! But is calling the masses "Sheeple" or individuals "Shills", "trolls" or "dis-info agents" just because they do not believe a particular conspiracy as right as equally offensive? if not why? Whats the difference?

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:54 PM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

For a long time, I was the type of person who had an "us vs. them" mentality. I grew up in a conservative home, but i saw glimpses of independent thought when my dad talked about Ross Perot. However, my parents were divorced and I was forced to form my own opinions, or so I thought. My mom had a boyfriend who listened to Rush Limbaugh, so I imagine a lot of my early views came from his opposition to President Clinton and all the other "liberal wackos." I didn't fully understand how much my opinions were molded by this until I started to talk to my half-brother about a lot of topics in 2005. He was into alternative media and helped me to see the foolishness of toting the party line, buying into the talking points spewed by Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly/Ingraham/Beck and the rest of the gang. I really liked Hannity during the 2004 election cycle. I was all on board with re-electing George W. Bush because we needed someone who knew how to fight against terrorism. That's what was fed to me, and I gobbled it up quickly, then regurgitated the filth. But spending more time with my brother, having deep discussions about real issues going on the country and in our own lives, woke me up to a new way of thinking. I didn't have to view Democrats as enemies anymore. I didn't have to view Republicans as flawless. I could question views I had held and change my mind if I wanted to. I was liberated from the mental and political slavery that I had been captive to for over 10 years. I won't lie, sometimes I still battle the tendency to go with the flow of the conservative pundits, but the more I read and think about things for myself, the more I'm able to make independent decisions.

Today, I consider myself very much libertarian on numerous issues. Some social issues, I hold very strong personal views, but I believe those things should be dealt with on a personal level or, at most, a state level. The American public needs to stop trying to beat each other and smear their neighbor who has a differing viewpoint. We need to have serious discussions without ad hominem attacks, strawman arguments, or name-calling. Perhaps if we started to act civilized, we may end up with appropriate representation.

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:54 PM

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by Jobeycool
I believe this government but they are playing way to much dangerous politics and are becoming untrustworthy.

Can you respect though others who have legitimate questions, and their right as Americans to demand government be accountable, transparent and answerable to the people and concede that the government has an obligation to answer to the American people, and not just the people who want to give it atta boys, and pat it on the back?

That is what I am saying.They are becoming dangerous with their political behavoir and lack of answering certain questions.They are slandering people and what not.They are way to divided.

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:56 PM

Originally posted by phatpackage
Whats the difference?

The difference is that we care about people and life,
and the life of the people deeply.

The MSM cares more about the feelings of the terrorists than the theorists.

David Grouchy

posted on May, 5 2011 @ 11:59 PM
reply to post by Klassified

I loved that movie by the way, and you are so right Rowdie Rodney had a heck of a time getting his friend to put on those specialized sunglasses and was only trying to help and save his friend, who fought him tooth and nail, in a knock down drag out fight not to put on the glasses.

Once he did though everything changed.

We are ruled by fear, and the truth is the truth is the real definition of terrorism is to use fear as a political tool.

What are they doing at the airports when they line up Americans to be searched, x-rayed, radiated, groped, and degraded and humiliated.

Selling the whole process with fear, fear of what will happen if you don't, fear of what will happen if you refuse to comply.

So the war on terror really is about terrorizing us, Americans into never challenging government and allowing it to put overlapping layer after overlapping layer of security, human and electronic over us, to monitor us constantly, and to force us to conform to it's edicts.

Did you vote for the Homeland Security Act or Patriot Act?

I know I sure didn't.

The truth is 640 people are the only ones who get to decide on these things for 400 million people.

Because it's not just one person making all the decisions it provides us the illusion of democracy, but it's absurd, that so few people can make such important and expensive and even deadly decisions for so many.

How do they do it, by just like you said, constantly selling us fear, presenting things in ways that are designed to prompt an emotional knee jerk reaction and not an intellectual well thought out response.

There is a huge difference between reacting, which is always emotional, and responding which is always intellectual.

Indeed how could we respond intellectually, when they provide so little detail and quality information to base an intellectual decision on.

Instead they provide only enough information and present it in a deliberate and calculating way to prompt an emotional reaction, that then creates the illusion that a true majority supports these things.

An illusion often sustained because those emotionally effected are much more likely to speak up and out vocally and forcefully to voice those fears.

The truth is in a temporal life and universe of fluid and infinite possibilities there is no way to safegaurd and plan for them all, so the security government tries to sell in the exchange of and price of rights and liberties is a fallacy and an illusion.

How do they do it, through manipulating our fears.

Excellent post, thanks so much for sharing that.

edit on 6/5/11 by ProtoplasmicTraveler because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:02 AM

Originally posted by lucidwave
Has any body read this CNN article, forgive me if the link has already been posted
Deathers take over where Birthers left off

I haven't but I will be sure to check it out and thanks for posting yet another example of the word games, and slander that the government and complicit medias coin and play to in effect silence and negate those with questions through overt ridicule.

Thanks for posting that.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:15 AM
reply to post by Fury1984

Your post is a great example of why it is so important to question authority, if you don't ask the questions and just go with the flow then you may find at some point down the road you may have been just supporting the wrong folks simply because your parents did.

I had a girlfriend once that was a devout christian, but when I asked her why she chose that path, she could not come up with a real and valid reason, she finally just said "Because my Mom and Dad are, so I am too!" and anymore discussion or attempt to have her validate the belief was met with hostility and I was told that I was just trying to make her question her beliefs and doing the Devil's work to her, nevertheless that relationship didn't last much longer, but with all honesty it was only to make her understand that it's ok to have beliefs, but have them on YOUR terms, not what the mainstream/parents/authorities tell you.

I have a 15 yr old son, and we have many many discussions on a great number of topics, but I do confuse him often, my main goal with him is to raise someone free from the "system" someone who feels no obligation to tow any party/belief line, so in his formative years I was very anti-Bush, he took on alot of those beliefs and then once Obama came to office he thought that would be the automatic line of thought and had trouble understanding why I throw out some of the very same criticism towards his administration that I criticized Bush for. He gets it now, for the most part, but the main lesson being taught to him and the main strength I want instilled in him, is not to just believe something because someone tells you to, it's more important to use the dialectical process - thesis vs antithesis = synthesis, listen and gather facts from all sides THEN form your own opinion and to never be so close minded that even your own opinion cannot evolve.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:26 AM

Originally posted by phatpackage
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Words like tin-foil hat, paranoid, anti-government, anti-Semite, Islamic sympathizer and others are often bandied about to describe those falling under the ever widening umbrella of conspiracy theorists.

Fair enough too! But is calling the masses "Sheeple" or individuals "Shills", "trolls" or "dis-info agents" just because they do not believe a particular conspiracy as right as equally offensive? if not why? Whats the difference?

First off there is no difference when people divide others into camps by labelling them, but the fact that something might be offensive when it comes to the truth, is no reason to shun or avoid the hard questions that lead to the truth.

What I am suggesting is taking the emotion out of it, and instead replacing it with honest to goodness questions.

If you find someone with an alternative theory has a theory that offends you, the first question you might want to ask is why does it offend you, because the truth is we live on a planet plagued by war, starvation, theft, murder, disease and fraud, so these things shouldn't be strangers to you.

Instead you might want to ask yourself instead, why not ask them questions how they arrived at that thinking, and if your only answer for their questions is their thinking offends you, then you aren't offering them any quality alternative answer at all.

Look at it this way, some people might ask the person who does the cooking in their household, what time is dinner going to be, and that answer might be, oh when it's ready.

That's not an answer, so you might ask well, could you narrow it down please, and they might respond oh sometime in the next hour or two, and that's not much of an answer.

So they might follow up and say well are we talking closer to five minutes from now or two hours from now, and they then might answer probably an hour and a half.

They might then confirm this and say, so it's going to be in an hour and a half, and the person then says, yes, in an hour and a half.

Now you finally have a real answer and real information but guess what, some people would have accepted the first answer.

Just because you accept the first answer shouldn't mean everyone else should, and just because you accepted a non-answer, that really was a non-answer, well don't be offended when somebody then questions why they didn't get a real answer, by inventing a theory through investigation or speculation as to what the real answer is.

Bottom line is, people know the difference between real answers, and non-answers, and partial answers.

One you have to make no excuses for, good bad or ugly, one you do have to, and one you have to make some.

If you don't have the answer, and you ultimately aren't the person responsible for supplying it or even capable because you aren't privy to all the facts, it is a bit rediculous to be mad at those who go searching for the answers, and speculating and investigating.


posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:31 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Thank you.

This is nothing but my speaking from experience in seeing both sides of conflict.

Just as I suspect you have.

Truth : The First Victim, The Last to Be Un-Buried, Never to Rest...

I was taught by my stepfather, a Vietnam era Marine, from the age of 6 years old.

Always look at what is said just as much as what is not said when it comes to history.

This was his subtle way of telling me to read between the lines and learn the real truth.

Victors write history over the vanquished but their story has just as much validity if not more.

Just because one side won does not necessarily mean they were right and the other side wrong.

As well as the vanquished side is not right and the victor is wrong.

Somewhere, deep down, between the cracks of history, the crevices of propaganda, truth lies.

So many people claim we had no foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor or 9/11.

This is a completely false claim due to those lost pieces of history many are too lazy to sift through.

Or which are hidden in some G-2 safe in the halls of the Pentagon or some O.N.I. brass hid away.

There are people out there, malicious, evil people, who would suppress that foreknowledge.

Just to profit off of the deaths of unwilling martyrs who were essentially murdered.

Not just by those heinous people's actions who attacked but by those who stood silent and did nothing.

Those people who stood by and did nothing and profited are just as culpable as those killing.

Mass murder is mass murder, and the semantics of "saving lives", is nothing more than an excuse.

The excuse covers up guilt, culpability, greed, you name it and it is buried there with that truth.
edit on 5/6/11 by SpartanKingLeonidas because: Adding Depth and Insight Into the Post.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:41 AM
America is not out of control it never has been and it never will be. Until you understand that you will be continually confused as to the actions of America...

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:47 AM

Originally posted by subtopia
America is not out of control it never has been and it never will be. Until you understand that you will be continually confused as to the actions of America...

Oh it's firmly under the control of the International Banking Cartel who manage it for the principle European Investors in the American Infrascture, but it is very much out of control of the American people.

I doubt there is anyone on the site that has done more quality research and prompted more quality research on who really owns and controls America.

While the two party system is entirely an illusion, the first step is getting the people to see how the two party system actually prevents Americans from getting control of the nation, it's finances, the knowledge of it's real debts, and why they are owed and to whom, and to hopefully one day then be able to transform it into what was promised, a constitutional government of the people for the people by the people, under the control and accountable to the people.

Not a few European Lords, Bankers, Royals and the Vatican, but to the actual American people.

A journey of a thousand miles begin with the first step.


edit on 6/5/11 by ProtoplasmicTraveler because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:56 AM
Great post...

I for one do not trust the government and I need to do more reasurch about what they're up to.

I hope others do the same.

Ask questions.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:57 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

My of what you just wrote made me feel as if you had read my mind. In fact I was just thinking today about how much fun I used to have in the past trying to find the truth of various real, and (admitedly) false conspiracies that I saw evidence for around me. I'd get into great discussions on the Internet, or just with friends, and feel as if I was making real progress. Now there is no more fun. Every conspiracy theory seems to come with a partisan label upon it. Most often I've noticed in recent years there has been an influx of Republican theories about the left. While being a democrat, and an admitedly pretty liberal guy I've been bothered by this...but not so bothered by that per se, as I've been bothered by the fact that the media now seems to want to label all conspiracy theorists as 'crazy Right Wingers'. What happened to us crazy Left Wing Conspiracy nuts?!?!

I remember a time when Conservatives and Liberals alike could meet on common ground. When both parties were horrified at things like the JFK assassination....when people of all ilks could debate things like Roswell and not have it turn into a Left VS Right debate.

I think that honestly at the heart of this problem is this Us Vs Them attitude that seems to be running rampant. I don't think that ALL Republicans are evil conspirators any more than I believe that ALL Democrats are blameless angels. Both sides do wrong, and we all should be willing to investigate all conspiracies for any truth. I've also known an alarming amount of people that hold their beliefs so strongly that they will continue to believe no matter what evidence to the contrary is placed in front of them......I honestly wish I knew why things are getting the way that they are....I guess its just a sign of the times. A reminder to just how much stress and worry is in the world right now.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 12:59 AM
reply to post by legitbrah

Thanks and hopefully you and many others will be taking your sage advice.

Research and ask questions, there sure is a lot Americans don't know about America but it's all out there in the treaties, and registrars, official documents, and old newspaper accounts, that can't be rewritten like history books.

You just have to want to know, and put the time and effort in.

We all win when we educate ourselves to the highest standards we can acheive.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 01:08 AM
reply to post by bhornbuckle75

Great post my friend and you struck on something important there at the end, and that's the times we live in.

Much of the rancor people display in their discourse really is a transference of stress and fear and anger from totally unrelated issues, finances, relationship stresses brought on by finances, insecurity in a corporate dominated job market, all conspire to keep people on edge.

It doesn't take much to set off someone living from paycheck to paycheck or hand out to hand out, loan to loan, trying to keep a roof over there and their families heads and with budgets streched so thin, many people do turn to the free entertainment and social interaction of the Internet and message boards just like ATS.

You like me are probably old enough to remember when the News was Walter Cronkite, a half hour a night, with ABC and NBC desperate for a chunk of the News pie.

It was short, brief, based on the most important topics, and factual oriented, with the only editorial coming in the last minute of the broadcast on just one topic Cronkite wanted to speak of.

Now the news is infotainment designed for niche partisan markets, every story is editorialized and spun to that end, and with 24 hours of programing to fill up, there is no shortage of vitriol, to go with the editorialized spin.

It provides people often what are angry and divisve yet seemingly politically correct talking points for their party and political views.

In essence turning them into a perfectly programmed wind up doll, and wound up people are indeed.

Great post, and thanks for sharing your experiences.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 01:53 AM
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Greetings, wonderful post

This is a subject I have thought of many times.

It reminds me of the quote in my signature, which i happened on in a discussion here on ATS just recently. It embodied how i feel about the nature of discourse better than i could ever hope to. I wont repost it in the body of this post as it is already below for all to see.

It is my belief that if we don't figure out how to co-exist and disagree at the same time, we will never truly be able to learn anything. I personally do not take to anger when I am proven wrong, or disagreed with. Especially when I, myself, am trying to learn the same thing as the person who disagrees with me. Are we not both trying to learn more about a subject that we both, admittedly, know little about? Is truth on a particular subject not both our goal?

I believe we are conditioned not to realize that most of us that are arguing have a common enemy.

One thing i have never understood is that since i was a kid, I can never remember anything speaking of the government in kind words. Everyone complains about it. Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Independents, etc.

As soon as you start discussing a person, or candidate though, that all changes. As if by magic.

So why can't we have a discussion about how none of us are satisfied, and how we can work together to change that, Instead of who's fault it is? Once we are satisfied with our conclusions, and try to turn those conclusions into action that can effect our own reality, then I will gladly re-visit the subject of who's fault it was, or how things got so out of control. Because that discussion too can give us a better understanding of how we can safeguard ourselves from reverting to the behavior that drove us to action. If I was a part of the problem, which i imagine we all are in some respect, I will change my ways. Because I know not repeating the same mistakes as a whole, still relies on each individual equally, so I pledge to do my part.

However, If that discussion turns into what we are so used to, I will not be anywhere to be found. If we just try to find another scapegoat, I will learn that we have not truly changed anything. If that is how it plays out, my faith in this plane will have been depleted, and I will find solace only in the fact that I know another plane awaits. I will move far away, and wait for my ticket, so to speak.

Our rights are those that we choose to exercise.


edit on 6-5-2011 by HawkMan11 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-5-2011 by HawkMan11 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-5-2011 by HawkMan11 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 01:56 AM
Great thread, really well though out and for it's short length it was very intellectually simulating. However I do think that you are "beating a dead horse" in the sense that no matter what we say, people won't change there minds about the tought questions which are posed as a threat to any official story. These same people would still brandish this thread as either a conspiracy theory or a bunch of words written by a traitor. - That's just my cynical 2 cents.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 02:06 AM
reply to post by SpeachM1litant

I see what you mean.

But at the time Britain regarded our defiance as treason. We know it as the American revolution. If we never stood up to be counted as traitors, would we have ever had the the chance of revolution?

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 02:09 AM
reply to post by HawkMan11

Excellent post my friend, and the truth is that while the Government itself creates and perpetuates and expands the nations problems, the real fault lies with guess who?

We the people.

The problem is we the people don't enjoy the prospect of that responsibility or the blame.

So we prefer to transfer it to an individual.

Did Barrack Obama make John or Jane Doe shop at Wal-Mart and buy Chinese Products that led to Americans losing jobs.

Did George Bush make John or Jane Doe turn against the Unions and those who used collective bargaining for a real living wage and real benefits.

Did Bill Clinton make John or Jane Doe go out and buy a SUV that can climb a mountain and hold seven people to transport little John and Jane Jr 5 miles to the local school?

Did George Bush Sr. make John and Jane Doe decide to keep up with Jone's by taking on a mountain of Credit Card debt?

Did Ronald Regan make John and Jane Doe swap out the equity in their home to pay off the debt of keeping up with the Jones family.

Did Jimmy Carter make John and Jane Doe stop going to their congressional reps local office when in town and demanding to speak to him?

Did Gerald Ford make John and Jane Doe so afraid of anyone that isn't Christian and American that we have to attack any country that isn't.

Did Richard Nixon force John and Jane Doe to abandon self education for talk shows, reality shows, video games and aspiring to the lowest common denominator?

Did Lyndon B Johnson convince John and Jane Doe that they can't make a difference?

No John and Jane Doe did all that on their own, and John and Jane Doe would in fact like to blame anyone but themselves, now that they have no jobs, their house is being foreclosed, and the nation is trillion dollars in debt.

The truth is that the system depenends on John and Jane Doe blaming someone else for all their poor choices, because if John and Jane Doe realized that they can make a difference, well then the Government would be accountable to the people, and the nation wouldn't be in the shape that it's in.

The truth is we love to blame other people for our own inability to self discipline ourselves, to not put our wants ahead of our needs, and to speak out and be involved and proactive on a local and national level about how are nation is run beyond just voting day once every two to four years.

So a lot of the problem, in fact most of the problem originates from there.

Ultimately what the government doesn't want you to believe or know is you, yourself can make a difference not with your vote on election day, but how you spend your money and where, and where you don't, and by being the squeeky wheel that ultimately has to get some grease.

Thanks for sharing that great post.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in