1
1
::::::::
"In fact, if one were to simply present the official plan by the elite of the world to create a one world scientific state, there would be no need for any type of theorizing, as the people and organizations planning this agenda have been rather straightforward about where they intend to take the world in their own publications over the last 100 years."
John Get A Clue made this statement in a recent diary post here at OEN - http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=10894 .
These people... This phrase, given its (at least) 100-year time period, refers to "generations" of people, I presume. I cannot see how any of the founding members that initially espoused the concept of a "one world scientific state" remain alive today. Therefore, the singleness of purpose displayed by these people, for what is admittedly a dog-eat-dog proposition, is akin to that of the Borg Collective in Star Trek – The Next Generation - http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Borg_philosophy .
Let's believe that "these people" actually exist as described on the global level. These people belong to such organizations as the Bilderberg Group (Mr M's favorite), Trilateral Commission, Council of Foreign Relations, Illuminati, Freemasons, Skull and Bones, Order of the Dragon - even CONTROL and KAOS from the Get Smart series - http://www.trosch.org/msn/puppetmasters.html . And these groups, by default, need to act in unison if they are to accomplish the nebulous goal, yet "official plan", of creating a one world scientific state.
Two things strike me as odd with these beliefs. First, why do these elites need so many differing "secret" organizations if their goals are essentially the same? And second, how can any one organization implement its "Plan" without adversely impacting another group's "Plan"? They seemingly should be at odds with one another.
The nature of the proposition alone – "a common global government created by separate groups" – is illogical. Each group would have its own agenda to advance. If not, you wouldn't have an individual group; instead, you'd have something resembling the above-mentioned Borg Collective. And such a thing clearly doesn't exist today, although I'm sure there are some that will argue that point. The burden of proving as such, though, rests with these... mystics. And they make a lifetime job out of "proving" their theories by demanding that the challenger or skeptic prove their paranoid theory first.
While I'll readily admit that conspiracy theories do exist and are real (e.g., 1605 Gunpowder Plot – Guy Fawkes Day, Operation Northwoods, Watergate, Iran-Contra, and the 1995 Sarin Gas Attack in Tokyo), these tend to be used by historians for credible purposes. They admittedly use incomplete evidence and stress the probability and not the certainty of the theory.
However, the "these people" alluded to by the diary's author (with a decidely ominous tone) are reflective of the core element to a paranoid conspiracy theory (PCT). Where valid conspiracy theories are those that are considered plausible, there are many conspiracy theories that are extremely implausible. Paranoia has a prominent role in these theories with a similar theme behind the alleged conspiracies – an evil purpose overseen by a secret or hidden power.
Common manifestations of this paranoia include the "darkness" theme, secret societies, deeply hidden agendas, and a deliberate intent for these evil forces' existence (e.g., world domination). The apparent timelessness of these forces results in their essentially omnipotent ability to remain undetectable by everyone, except for the paranoid conspiracy theorists, of course! How convenient is this!
These people have removed the Scales of Lies from their eyes and now see... "the Truth".
PCTs are, by nature, difficult to debunk. Why? Well, PCTs do not formulate their theories using the scientific method - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method (e.g., 9/11 Truth Movement), and so, applying logic and reason to them is typically futile. Furthermore, the paranoid conspiracy theorist is usually a textbook example of cognitive dissonance and compartmentalization - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance . These are big words that describe how the paranoid theorist lies about a particular issue (e.g., secret societies) and yet is not aware that they have lied. Any attempt to persuade such a paranoid theorist of their flawed analyses and conclusions is met with harsh and often slandering responses.
These theorists are truly "eyes wide shut" thinkers, and no amount of reasoning will deter them from believing what they have conceived as "the Truth". Thankfully, though, these folks have common characteristics that are easily recognizable. Among them are: (1) they assume that theirs is the right theory, (2) their theories cannot be challenged, and (3) any evidence works just fine - http://vulcanis.wordpress.com/2008/03/12/searching-for-truth-psychosocial-characteristics-of-conspiracy-theories/ !
(1) With the "right" theory, these theorists have accepted their beliefs as being correct - period. Those who don't see the "evidence" their way have usually (1) allowed themselves to be duped, (2) are intellectually incapable of grasping the truth, (3) or are part of the paranoid conspiracy itself.
In reality, though, this stance is an argument from ignorance (i.e., argumentum ad ignorantiam - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance ). For these "thinkers", the burden of proof rests firmly on their opponents, whose very existence is falsely assumed by the paranoid theorists to disprove their PCTs. These thinkers' positions do not change - even if their theories are disproved - because there is ALWAYS a way (or need) of reaffirming their theory's prominence.
Typically, there is little or no REAL evidence to back their theories. Instead, the paranoid theorist relies heavily on retrospective analysis (aka couch quarterbacking) where literally EVERYTHING can be twisted to fit the evil plot. Events and "evidence" are handpicked so as to be interpreted as supporting the paranoid theory; logic and reason do not matter because the conclusion was already known.
(2) Regarding the notion that the theory cannot be challenged, paranoid theorists intentionally do not develop their theories using methods employed by a scientist or historian. The scientist and historian welcome challenges to their theory, which will either strengthen it or refute/amend it. The scientific method itself requires that your theory (including all of the available evidence and associated conclusions) be reviewed by others (aka peers) to either confirm or deny the results.
However, the paranoid theorist vehemently opposes any and all challenges to their theories. Typically, the first defense against a challenge is to personally attack the challenger (i.e., ad hominem - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem ). The attacks are generally in the form of ridicule and focus on the challenger's "faulty" intelligence, politics, religion, ethnicity, or even physical looks (e.g., funny berets). And because of these obvious character "flaws", the challenger's words or thoughts are simply wrong due to their inability (intentional or unintentional) to accept "the Truth".
PCTs are also usually unfalsifiable (e.g., UFOs are alien in origin, 9/11 was an "inside job", and big pharma has the cure for HIV/AIDS) but "the government" or "New World Order" is suppressing the evidence that would prove the paranoid conspiracy theory "true". Any debunking that references an official source is dismissed immediately by the paranoid theorist because they know that the so-called REAL evidence refuting their claims is contrived or planted by those "forces of darkness" who are out to fool the people – or sheeple - http://www.wanttoknow.info/911truthout .
(3) And about any evidence works just fine... evidence that supports the PCTs will be accepted uncritically as "the Truth" (e.g., molten STEEL - not aluminum - was present within the WTC debris piles). Conversely, evidence that opposes the PCTs is dismissed casually for various reasons – none logical and almost all emotional (i.e., the appeal to emotion - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion ). Interestingly, the quality, accuracy, or provenance of the evidence is not important, AS LONG AS it supports the paranoid conspiracy theory. This willingness by the paranoid theorist to accept any source of information that fits the PCT inevitably leads to an abundance of misinformation surrounding events.
Naturally, though, and in keeping with the paranoia, this misinformation is actually intentional disinformation caused by the "malevolent forces" that are constantly working to spread evil and thwart the paranoid theorist from revealing "the Truth" to the people. In fact, this is precisely what John Get a Clue alluded to in his diary entry.
PCTs are very appealing to the uncritical or unstable mind. As such, individuals who are fantasy-prone, irrational thinkers, or those who may have psychological problems (e.g., paranoia, delusional, narcissistic, or manic/depressive) are often quickly enmeshed into the strange but compelling world of fantasy and/or fear that forms the core of a PCT.
Once critical thinking is applied, though, and a search for REAL evidence is sought, PCTs are found to lack credibility and tend to resemble B-rated sci-fi works. Not without cause, many of the better known proponents of PCTs, are authors or celebrities, whose works or words center around science-fiction, religion, spirituality, or social injustice. A quick review of the 9/11 Truth Movement reveals that well known proponents, like Dr. Steven Jones, uses Mormonism to support his "science-based" claims - http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=6959 , while Dr. James Fetzer, a theologian, comments on 9/11-related scientific matters for the Christian community - http://911review.com/articles/griffin/madison.html .
Unfortunately for the proponents of PCTs, their only defense against constructive criticism of their theories continues to be personal attacks upon the challengers, who are clearly nothing more than disinformation agents. After all, why would ANYONE not want "the Truth" to be known? Well, personally, I reject the paranoid theorist's perception of the Truth because I disdain ignorance. Then again, that's just me - an alleged shill that's been labeled as such by many at OEN. Yet not one of these paranoid theorists have produced anything stronger than their fantasy and typing fingers as evidence of my shill position.
