(1) Philosophical discussion (i.e mostly speculation)
(2) Evaluation of factual evidence
(1) PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSION
Such discussions may be valuable, relevant, and fun ... but, in the final analysis, they are primarily speculative in nature and do not rise above the level of casual conversation. In this approach, everyone's ideas are considered just as relevant or valuable as anybody else’s. There is asserted to be a moral and practical equivalence to virtually every assertion made and, consequently, nothing in dispute can be resolved.
(2) FACTUAL EVIDENCE
This approach is much more labor-intensive because careful research
and analysis is required. In this approach...
· specific assertions or statements are made
· the truth or falsity of each assertion or statement must be
determined
· truthful assertions and statements must then be evaluated,
weighed for importance, relevance, or emphasis
· factual data is then combined to form arguments or theories
· those arguments and theories must then be analyzed to determine
that they are logical, rational, and don't exceed whatever factual
evidence has thus far been discovered.
The “problem” with the “factual evidence” route of inquiry is that such evidence may not be convenient or helpful to the conspiracy theory under scrutiny.
Political conspiracy theories are problem-solving devices. They exist solely to offer an hypothesis for why persons and groups perceived as noxious enemies to the commonweal have, nevertheless, been successful and predominant over long periods of time in achieving power, influence, and wealth.
Such theories usually are created by the "losers" in public policy debates---particularly if the losers have rarely (or never) been successful in influencing or determining public policy over long periods of time.
The hypothesis of "losers" is as follows:
It is inconceivable that the same person(s) and group(s) could repeatedly prevail in elections and policy debates and thus wield power and influence over long periods of time (plus accumulate purportedly undeserved wealth, status, awards and honors) without the reason being some underlying and ongoing corruption of political processes.
