Has there ever been a Conspiracy Theory that was in fact true?

[Scott Sommers]

And as if by magic, another thread has just provided an example of my point
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=224504

 

[Oystein]

...
There was Monica-gate, but that was blown pretty quickly too... (sorry couldn't resist).
...

This reveals a high degree of confusion about the terms "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory".

* "Conspiracy": How is Monicagate a conspiracy? Who conspired with whom against whom to commit which crime?

* "Conspiracy theory" - was there a fringe of conspiracy theorists who discussed the possibility and details of a cabal involving Miss Lewinsky and Mr. Clinton before the affair was revealed by media and investigators? An allegation does not turn into a CT just because the alleged perpetrators at first deny any wrongdoing.

 

[Scott Sommers]

This reveals a high degree of confusion about the terms "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory".

* "Conspiracy": How is Monicagate a conspiracy? Who conspired with whom against whom to commit which crime?

* "Conspiracy theory" - was there a fringe of conspiracy theorists who discussed the possibility and details of a cabal involving Miss Lewinsky and Mr. Clinton before the affair was revealed by media and investigators? An allegation does not turn into a CT just because the alleged perpetrators at first deny any wrongdoing.

This is an excellent point. It appears to me, what those involved in this thread are calling a 'conspiracy theory' is something that has been 'covered up', particularly by 'the government'. So, as I pointed out, if the credit card companies, the banks, and the legal system conspire to cover up the credit card debt of your spouse, is that a conspiracy theory that was true? Is the recent N.Y.P.D. Ticket-Fixing Scandal a conspiracy theory that ended up being true?

I'm sure there are people who think these are. But then the term 'conspiracy theory' becomes meaningless in describing real life events.

 

[332nd]

The Tuskegee Experiment.

 

[MG1962]

Definitely doesn't qualify. The cause of the Maine explosion is still uncertain, with different analyses suggesting different causes; the most recent analysis suggests that the explosion originated outside the hull, suggesting a mine rather than an internal explosion; even an internal explosion wouldn't be proof of a conspiracy, because accidental internal explosions did destroy battleships in the coal era from time to time (look up HMS Vanguard, which blew up in Scapa Flow in 1917, for which there is no conceivable conspiracist motive); and nobody has ever produced any evidence of there being any conspiracy involving any specific individuals to fake it.

Dave

The reasons I mention the Maine, are twofold. Initially the US government assumed it was just one of those things as you describe in your post. As the public outcry grew the US government ran with the Cuban answer and used it as one of their trump cards in dealing with the Spanish.

In a 112 years since the sinking, no Cuban/Spanish group or individuals has ever claimed responsibly for the attack. No archive has ever turned up evidence of plan to blow up the ship.

So we have two possible conclusions. The Sampson committee was influenced to arrive at a less than accurate result to its investigation

A Cuban plot existed but evidence is so deeply hidden some incredibly powerful people and organisations had to be involved to allow the cover up to be so successful.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The reasons I mention the Maine, are twofold. Initially the US government assumed it was just one of those things as you describe in your post. As the public outcry grew the US government ran with the Cuban answer and used it as one of their trump cards in dealing with the Spanish.

In a 112 years since the sinking, no Cuban/Spanish group or individuals has ever claimed responsibly for the attack. No archive has ever turned up evidence of plan to blow up the ship.

So we have two possible conclusions. The Sampson committee was influenced to arrive at a less than accurate result to its investigation

A Cuban plot existed but evidence is so deeply hidden some incredibly powerful people and organisations had to be involved to allow the cover up to be so successful.

That's a false dilemma. The Sampson committee was not omniscient, the evidence available was limited, and nobody has been able to come up with a truly definitive cause for the sinking through re-examination of the evidence; even the most recent investigation only rates an internal explosion as not likely, rather than impossible. Given that computer modelling can't give a conclusive answer, it's rather a stretch to say that the Sampson committee can only have got it wrong due to external influence. So at the very least we have the third possibility, that the Maine was destroyed by an internal explosion but that the Sampson committee sincerely believed, on the basis of inadequate information, that a mine was responsible, as did the National Geographic investigation.

Dave

 

[Scott Sommers]

The Tuskegee Experiment.

You may not have access to Wikipedia where you live, so you wouldn't know that the existence of the Tuskegee Experiment was widespread and freely available among researchers of the topic.

The Tuskegee Study published its first clinical data in 1934 and issued their first major report in 1936.

as one of the references to the Wiki states,

The study, which was conducted openly and without secrecy,

Apparently you can read some of the results in this published research paper,
Pesare, P.J. et al. (1950), 'Untreated Syphilis in the Male Negro: Observations of Abnormalities Over Sixteen Years', American Journal of Syphilis, Gonorrhea, and Venereal Diseases, 34:210-213

You can read this paper,
http://ajph.aphapublications.org/cgi/reprint/81/11/1498.pdf
particularly the section,
How Did It Go on for so Long
to see that in fact, knowledge of the study was well-known and it was the well-knownness of the study that lead to it being picked up by mainstream media.

It may seem hard to believe in 2011 that doctors would tolerate this, but times were different back then. Tuskegee is no conspiracy theory. In fact, it wasn't even a conspiracy. It was just a thing that doctors did back then that you have trouble today believing wasn't a bunch of mad scientists.

 

[geni]

Part of the problem is there there is a language issue. Historians don't like to use the term "Conspiracy Theory" so they tend to talk about rumors or reports.

So for example in 1641 there was a conspiracy theory that George Goring was going to declare Portsmouth for the king and against parliment (a matter of some concern since portsmouth was england's only really well fortified seaport at the time). The theory was dissmissed after he was summoned to parliment and sucessfuly defended himself against the accusations.

2 August 1642 Goring declared for the King

 

[Alferd_Packer]

There's the streetcar conspiracy.

 

[theprestige]

In the recent past, has there ever been a Conspiracy Theory that when it was all said and done, it turned out to have been true, there was a conspiracy and it was exposed.

It depends what you mean by "conspiracy theory". Take Watergate, for example. There was a real conspiracy there. Woodward and Bernstein had a theory that this conspiracy was there, and upon investigation their conspiracy theory was shown to be true. There was a conspiracy, and it was exposed.

COINTELPRO, the way Gazpacho described it upthread is another good example: People theorized that the FBI was conspiring against them. It turns out their conspiracy theory was true. There was a conspiracy, and it was exposed.

So that's one meaning of "conspiracy theory". Someone has a theory about a conspiracy. They investigate, find evidence, and expose the conspiracy. Is that what you mean by "conspiracy theory", GregHouseMD? If so, then yes: conspiracy theories are proven to be true all the time.

Any time the police bust a smuggling ring, that's a conspiracy theory that was in fact true. Any time a citizen's watchdog group uncovers corruption at City Hall, that's a conspiracy theory that was in fact true. But in practice, nobody ever refers to these kinds of investigations as "conspiracy theories".

Instead, the term "conspiracy theory" usually refers to a certain kind of ignorance-based magical thinking that rejects contrary evidence and that multiplies entities unnecessarily.

So that's the other meaning of "conspiracy theory". Someone is engaging in profoundly flawed thinking, the kind of thinking that almost never finds the truth, because it actively rejects the truth. Is that what you mean by "conspiracy theory"? If so, then no: conspiracy theories are almost never true, for the same reason lies are almost never true: The terms identify things that are by definition untrue.

 

[kevsta]

Would covert intervention in markets by authorities or central banks count?

the people who are certain that they see it are labeled conspiracy theorists, so I would assume so?

 

[Tomtomkent]

I heard some terrorists conspired to fly jets into buildings on 9/11. That seems to be true.

There was also a planned coup in the UK in the Heath era. Military put on exercises around airports, a small bunch ready to wrest control of the country, but they stood down and backed off before crossing the line. It was a conspiracy, it was real, but nothing came of it so life moved on.

ETA: It turns out most real conspiracies are pretty dull. Especially compared to what CTers WANT to believe.

 

[bynmdsue]

According to my definition of "Conspiracy Theory", no. My definition being an alternative history which has a secret cabal pulling the strings behind the scenes. YMMV.

 

[Childlike Empress]

What else? When in the past 100 years has a deep dark secret been kept from the public to cover the activities of a select few in power?

Would Propaganda Due qualify? Ergenekon?

 

[GregHouseMD]

This reveals a high degree of confusion about the terms "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory".

* "Conspiracy": How is Monicagate a conspiracy? Who conspired with whom against whom to commit which crime?

* "Conspiracy theory" - was there a fringe of conspiracy theorists who discussed the possibility and details of a cabal involving Miss Lewinsky and Mr. Clinton before the affair was revealed by media and investigators? An allegation does not turn into a CT just because the alleged perpetrators at first deny any wrongdoing.

Monica and Bill conspired against Hillary to keep her from finding out about Bill getting his ashes hauled.

Bill then used his position to try to cover it up. He openly denied it on national TV and his staff found Monica a new job.

Friends and co workers of Monica advised her how to handle the situation. Some advised her to keep quiet, others said she should report it as sexual harassment.

It was debated for weeks and some people claimed it was a right wing conspiracy to destroy Bill Clinton.

 

[Robrob]

To define terms maybe we need to look at what the CT consider conspiracies?

Perhaps we could take the Maine as an example - just to avoid getting too wrapped up in more modern political issues?

AFAICT, the historical debate about the Maine was it sank because of:

1) The Spanish in an act of aggression.

2) An accidental boiler explosion.

3) The US in a conspiracy to implicate the Spanish.

If we look at the results:

1) Foolish because Spanish cover up or not, it got them into war. This fails the CT test.

2) Branding an accident as someone else's act of war? This fits the CT model somewhat but not very well. No "false flag" or ninjas required, just simple yellow journalism.

3) This fits the classic CT model. Ninjas sneak into the boat, thermite "explodes," war is declared, etc... The "true villains go unpunished, etc...

In history, has there been an actual verifiable case of a successful #3?

 

[LSSBB]

There's the streetcar conspiracy.

AP, I see that you brought this up in the previous thread on this subject, and I wonder why no one discusses it. It is the one example I could think of myself in discussing CTs with my kids, of a real, large industrial-government conspiracy that proves true that even had people calling it out as a conspiracy at the time. Of course, it is not so simple a subject, and thus I wonder why no one is even taking up the discussion on it.

 

[bynmdsue]

Monica and Bill conspired against Hillary to keep her from finding out about Bill getting his ashes hauled.

Bill then used his position to try to cover it up. He openly denied it on national TV and his staff found Monica a new job.

Friends and co workers of Monica advised her how to handle the situation. Some advised her to keep quiet, others said she should report it as sexual harassment.

It was debated for weeks and some people claimed it was a right wing conspiracy to destroy Bill Clinton.

Don't forget Mike Isikoff wrote in The Washington Weekly that "a former White House staffer" with the initial "M" in her name was going to go public with a sexual harassment story. Shortly thereafter Mary Mahoney, former intern, was murdered in a "robbery" where no money was taken and there was no forced entry. Dun dun DUN! Conspiracy or coincidence? or completely unrelated?

Answer- Completely unrelated, y'know in the real world. But in the world of conspiracy theories... THERE ARE NO COINCIDENCES!

 

[Robrob]

AP, I see that you brought this up in the previous thread on this subject, and I wonder why no one discusses it. It is the one example I could think of myself in discussing CTs with my kids, of a real, large industrial-government conspiracy that proves true that even had people calling it out as a conspiracy at the time. Of course, it is not so simple a subject, and thus I wonder why no one is even taking up the discussion on it.

Even accepting it as true, there seems to be no real allegations of anything other than GM trying to corner the market. No government cover-up. No ninjas. No elimination of witnesses or witness intimidation. All the hallmarks of a good CT.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

AP, I see that you brought this up in the previous thread on this subject, and I wonder why no one discusses it. It is the one example I could think of myself in discussing CTs with my kids, of a real, large industrial-government conspiracy that proves true that even had people calling it out as a conspiracy at the time. Of course, it is not so simple a subject, and thus I wonder why no one is even taking up the discussion on it.

It was a great plot twist in Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

Although there are some who argue that there was no conspiracy, just a change in social economics.