My simple take on conspiracies: Looking at the @AndrewYang @MSNBC series, it‘s clear that this is not a repeating accident. However what we’re really worrying about is this. What happens if we start to acknowledge these cryptic power moves? Does the world become Qanon & InfoWars?
If we teach COINTELPRO do we start believing in Reptilians? If we acknowledge the Powell Memo, do we believe in Illuminati next? Does questioning Epstein’s death and any connection of his to intelligence communities legitimize all of Pizzagate? Does Jean Seberg destroy all news?
Does our suspicion that the Warren Report was used to silence questions around JFK open up the idea that our government is illegitimate when it releases findings?
Sadly, the answer is that we’re falling into 3 types. Conspiracy deniers, Conspricay nuts & a tiny third group.
Sadly, the answer is that we’re falling into 3 types. Conspiracy deniers, Conspricay nuts & a tiny third group.
The deniers fear legitimizing deep questions & concern about ground truth, interests, power, leverage, cryptic organizations, etc. Better to avoid the slippery slope without near certain evidence they say.
Nuts want hidden order everywhere. They want to be in on a secret world.
Nuts want hidden order everywhere. They want to be in on a secret world.
The third group (mine) has had it with both of these groups. We know enough to discuss Type I vs Type II error. We don’t know what’s going on most of the time so the nutters make us crazy. We also don’t believe that Jeffrey Epstein’s coverage is normal. We can map irregularity.
We also know we can be wrong & don’t think that makes us nutters or dupes. It’s Type I vs Type II error & we refuse to get all weird because it involves conspiracies. This is a normal thing to think about unless you know ABSOLUTELY nothing about the history of proven conspiracy!
Two of the most important issues at the moment in this space are about the news:
A) What is the explanation for the bizarre coverage of Jeffrey Epstein?
B) What is the explanation for the bizarre coverage every 4 years of popular candidates outside the system gaining traction?
A) What is the explanation for the bizarre coverage of Jeffrey Epstein?
B) What is the explanation for the bizarre coverage every 4 years of popular candidates outside the system gaining traction?
We know enough to know that something is wildly off in both cases but we don’t know exactly what. That makes both the Nutters & the deniers extremely uncomfortable with us. We may be near certain something is off like nutters but reject detailed theories w/o proof like deniers.
My conclusion is simple: consider joining us. If you’ve outgrown radical pro-life v pro-choice. If you‘re too smart for pure capitalism vs communism. If you can’t get the old camps to work for you, consider taking Type I vs II approach to conspiracies. As you would anything else.
