Ridicule of Conspiracy Theories Focuses On Diffusing Criticism of the Powerful


The label “conspiracy theory” is commonly used to try to discredit criticism of the powerful in government or business.

For example, just this week – after Tony Blair was confronted by the Iraq Inquiry with evidence that he had used lies to sell the Iraq war – Blair dismissed the entire Iraq Inquiry as simply being part of Britain’s “obsession with conspiracy theories. (Not only did Blair know that Saddam possessed no WMDs, but the French this week accused Blair of using of ‘Soviet-style’ propaganda in run-up to the Iraq war).

Of course, the American government has been busted in the last couple of years in numerous conspiracies. For example, William K. Black – professor of economics and law, and the senior regulator during the S & L crisis – says that that the government’s entire strategy now – as during the S&L crisis – is to cover up how bad things are (“the entire strategy is to keep people from getting the facts”).Similarly , 7 out of the 8 giant, money center banks went bankrupt in the 1980’s during the “Latin American Crisis”, and the government’s response was to cover up their insolvency.

And the government spied on American citizens (even before 9/11 … confirmed here and here), while saying “we don’t spy”. The government tortured prisoners in Iraq, but said “we don’t torture”.

In other words, high-level government officials have conspired to cover up the truth.

And Tom Brokaw notes:

All wars are based on propaganda.

A concerted effort to produce propaganda is a conspiracy.

Acceptable Versus Unacceptable Conspiracy Theories

Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials have been found guilty of conspiracy. See this, this, this, this and this.

Time Magazine’s financial columnist Justin Fox writes:

Some financial market conspiracies are real …

Most good investigative reporters are conspiracy theorists, by the way.

Indeed, conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven by the evidence.

But – while people might admit that corporate executives and low-level government officials might have engaged in conspiracies – they may be strongly opposed to considering that the wealthiest or most powerful might possibly have done so.

Indeed, those who most loudly attempt to ridicule and discredit conspiracy theories tend to focus on defending against criticism involving the powerful.

This may be partly due to psychology: it is scary for people to admit that those who are supposed to be their “leaders” protecting them may in fact be human beings with complicated motives who may not always have their best interests in mind. And see this.

For example, Obama’s current head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs – and a favored pick for the Supreme Court (Cass Sunstein) – previously:

Defined a conspiracy theory as “an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role.”

He has called for the use of state power to crush conspiracy allegations of state wrongdoing. See this, this and this.


Michael Kelly, a Washington Post journalist and neoconservative critic of anti-war movements on both the left and right, coined the term “fusion paranoia” to refer to a political convergence of left-wing and right-wing activists around anti-war issues and civil liberties, which he claimed were motivated by a shared belief in conspiracism or anti-government views.

In other words, prominent neocon writer Kelly believes that everyone who is not a booster for government power and war is a crazy conspiracy theorist.

Similarly, psychologists who serve the government eagerly label anyone “taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, … and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook” as crazy conspiracy theorists.

This is not really new. In Stalinist Russia, anyone who criticized the government was labeled crazy, and many were sent to insane asylums.

Using the Power of the State to Crush Criticism of the Government

The bottom line is that the power of the state is used to crush criticism of major government policies and actions (or failures to act) and high-level government officials.

Pay attention, and you’ll notice that criticism of “conspiracy theories” is usually aimed at attempting to protect the state and key government players. The power of the state is seldom used to crush conspiracy theories regarding people who are not powerful . . . at least to the extent that they are not important to the government.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Pingback: Polls: Americans Want to Rein In The Fed, Bring the Troops Home and Restore Our Constitutional Rights()

  • Pingback: Polls: Americans Want Our Liberties Restored, Our Troops Brought Home and the Federal Reserve Reined In | Dark Politricks()

  • Pingback: Polls: Americans Want Liberties Restored, Troops Brought Home and Fed Reined In | The Big Picture()

  • Pingback: Polls: Americans Want Liberties Restored, Troops Brought Home and Fed Reined In | Bailout and Financial Crisis News()

  • deano

    Just watched the film “EXPELLED:No intelligence allowed”. The film brings to our attention that modern science has an evolutioinist & aethiest agenda, because if Intelligent Design is brought into a classroom, the academic will probably lose their tenure & employment.
    The emphasis that ID equates to Creationism, & opposes modern scientific consensus that evolution is now fact.
    Funnily,however, is when Professor Dawkins(Delusion of God) is questioned on the ORIGIN of life, he has no qualms in supporting Directed Panspermia, the arrival of designed life sent to Earth from an alien source as theorized by Crick, who actually found DNA.
    If one mentions UFOs & Aliens, you are quickly ridiculed as a conspiracy theorist nutjob, but apparently it is O.K if you are the worlds leading aethiest & Proffesor of Evolution.
    On the other side of the coin, being a Creationist is not allowed, yet the US dollar has “IN GOD WE TRUST” printed on it, & President Bush used faith as a rally for the war on terror, with cries of “crusade against the evildoers”, “God is on our side” & “God bless America” etc,etc.

    Does this not stink of double standards & hypocrasy? I was always taught you cant have it both ways.

    My views are that I am Skeptical of what the US govt told us about 9/11 & believe there is a UFO cover-up & denial . Apparently this makes me a Conspiracy Theorist. I prefer a Truthseeker for there remains a lot of questions about both topics that just dont make rational sense & remain unanswered.

    Why is it so hard for people to realise that maybe 9/11 was a govt operation to ultimately justify wars in the Middle-East, especially after Gen. Wes Clarke’s 7 countries in 5 years, which has nearly come to fruition? Operation Northwoods Sec 8a/b describes method,Mockingbird media involvement

    As for UFOs, think of their advanced energy devices, which could provide free energy to the world. This is something that Energy giants & govts would want to hide because our whole economic system would have to change>unthinkable to profiteers but not IMPOSSIBLE!

    33 Conspiracy Theories Proven True, will shock the uninformed, but once you realise what govts are capable of doing, have done, & will deny or lie about, you will be awakened & maybe just start to become SKEPTICAL of what they preach as “Gospel”, & in this extremely materialistic world “Follow the MONEY”, that is where the TRUTH hides……….