What Motivates Conspiracy Theorists?

[ehcks]

That isn't what the study actually says, that is what the conspiracy sites you quote claim it says. Try reading the actual study, rather than what conspiraloons want in to say, I mean PressTV, Infowars, ATS, you consider these credible?

I can't seem to find that study. I found a different study by the same authors that was simply comparing the quantity of comments on articles and blogs in favor or against conspiracies.

 

[Joey McGee]

All the hot chicks.

 

[kellyb]

I'd guess that some can't emotionally cope with the idea that the world can be so random and chaotic. They find it more emotionally appealing to believe there are "bad guys" in control than to accept that the world is wild and weird. The idea that NOBODY is in control is just too terrifying.

 

[carlitos]

Anything other than the official story would be a conspiracy theory...
But, here's a study about CT's...
Look for "New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane, while government dupes are crazy and hostile" (I cannot add a link... to new here..)
--------------------

Welcome to the forum! The actual article has already been linked in this thread:

Are you talk about this? I've read the abstract and it seems interesting, but I have doubts about how it applies to this thread.

I don't know who wrote what you posted, but his conclusions are not logical.

The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority.

Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.”

Whoops. No, it means that conspiracy theorists are more likely to leave comments on news articles. The rest does not follow from the author's mistaken thinking. You can't extrapolate from "people who comment on news articles" to the general population.

 

[Snarf]

I'd guess that some can't emotionally cope with the idea that the world can be so random and chaotic. They find it more emotionally appealing to believe there are "bad guys" in control than to accept that the world is wild and weird. The idea that NOBODY is in control is just too terrifying.

Much like a religious person.

 

[Mudcat]

I don't know who wrote what you posted, but his conclusions are not logical.

I agree, which is why I doubt how it applies to the thread.

I'd guess that some can't emotionally cope with the idea that the world can be so random and chaotic. They find it more emotionally appealing to believe there are "bad guys" in control than to accept that the world is wild and weird. The idea that NOBODY is in control is just too terrifying.

Much like a religious person.

I don't know, there are fundamental differences between religionists and conspiracy theorists that are unreconcilable.

 

[Robrob]

Whoops. No, it means that conspiracy theorists are more likely to leave comments on news articles. The rest does not follow from the author's mistaken thinking. You can't extrapolate from "people who comment on news articles" to the general population.

Not to mention when reading an article describing a plane crash (for example), CT are much more likely to spontaneously post contrary statements while a normal person wouldn't have anything to add in the first place.

 

[Mark F]

Anybody who can rig a dialysis machine to work in a cave could certainly pull off 9/11.

I am going to steal that line from time to time.

 

[JayUtah]

Anybody who can rig a dialysis machine to work in a cave could certainly pull off 9/11.

I sorta have this mental image of it rigged up in Gilligan's Island style, connected to a bicycle on which all the Taliban take turns riding.

 

[carlitos]

I agree, which is why I doubt how it applies to the thread.

I'm sorry, but I was unclear. The article you posted is reasonably coherent on this issue, and I think it contributes a great deal to the subject of this thread.

Kevin Ryan posted some nonsense that he made up about that article and it's being quoted on conspiracy websites. That is what new member cloggy posted and I was replying to.

 

[LaurelHS]

I'd guess that some can't emotionally cope with the idea that the world can be so random and chaotic. They find it more emotionally appealing to believe there are "bad guys" in control than to accept that the world is wild and weird. The idea that NOBODY is in control is just too terrifying.

I've heard this before too. There was a Vanity Fair article called "Welcome To The Conspiracy" and Rich Cohen said that CTism was an "oddly self-comforting worldview" because "nothing is accidental, everything can be explained, and someone is always in control."

 

[JayUtah]

I've heard this before too. There was a Vanity Fair article called "Welcome To The Conspiracy" and Rich Cohen said that CTism was an "oddly self-comforting worldview" because "nothing is accidental, everything can be explained, and someone is always in control."

I think there is some perverse measure of comfort in having a designated enemy. Conspiracism, as I see it, is predicated largely on identifying some Powers That Be as the root of all evil. There is a parallel in some religions that identify a Devil.

The goal is simply the problem of evil. One wants an explanation for the inevitable suffering and disappointment that arises in the world. Defining them as inherent and unavoidable could be construed as disconcerting because it implies nothing can be done about them. Defining them instead as the nefarious wishes of some intelligent agent acting in secret provides some measure of comfort by holding out the hope that, absent these evil influences, the world would be great. And by revealing what was supposed to be a secret evil cabal, the conspiracist believes he has thwarted those evil plans.

 

[kellyb]

I think there is some perverse measure of comfort in having a designated enemy. Conspiracism, as I see it, is predicated largely on identifying some Powers That Be as the root of all evil. There is a parallel in some religions that identify a Devil.

The goal is simply the problem of evil. One wants an explanation for the inevitable suffering and disappointment that arises in the world. Defining them as inherent and unavoidable could be construed as disconcerting because it implies nothing can be done about them. Defining them instead as the nefarious wishes of some intelligent agent acting in secret provides some measure of comfort by holding out the hope that, absent these evil influences, the world would be great. And by revealing what was supposed to be a secret evil cabal, the conspiracist believes he has thwarted those evil plans.

And if not thwarting, at least doing something about it, even if it is just posting on the internet or preaching in the streets.

It's interesting that there aren't any popular "good" conspiracy theories, like widespread belief that George Soros and "the Globalists" are fundamentally overall benevolent and doing a better job running the world than random chance and chaos would, or that the Bilderbergers are secretly plotting world peace and prosperity for all.

I guess some of the UFO fanatics believe that aliens are giving governments technology to help us and lead us into some intergalactic brotherhood of peace-loving sentient beings or whatever, but most of those people are heavily mixing their CTs with New Age Mysticism (interdimensional beings, telepathy, and astrology, oh my!), so they're a slightly different personality type from the Alex Jones fans.

 

[LSSBB]

I sorta have this mental image of it rigged up in Gilligan's Island style, connected to a bicycle on which all the Taliban take turns riding.

Bamboo tech!

 

[JayUtah]

And if not thwarting, at least doing something about it, even if it is just posting on the internet or preaching in the streets.

Indeed I think the standard of effectiveness centers around exposure of the nefarious activity, not alleviation. In fact the sentiment, "There's nothing we can do to stop them!" factors into the mythos. But to belabor my previous point, the presumption is that the conspirators want their actions to be kept secret. Exposing them to the public is perceived to have a deleterious effect.

It's interesting that there aren't any popular "good" conspiracy theories, ...

Theories, no. But there are plenty of beneficial conspiracies in fact. Go look at the donations page of any charitable, artistic, or philanthropic organization and you'll find a substantial number of anonymous donors. There is indeed a conspiracy on the part of the wealthy to enrich the lives of their fellow beings.

But your point isn't lost: the effect of conspiracy theories to create a devil is what drives the eventual "victory." That's pointless if the conspiracy isn't aimed at oppression.

I guess some of the UFO fanatics believe that aliens are giving governments technology to help us and lead us into some intergalactic brotherhood of peace-loving sentient beings or whatever...

Emphasis on the "whatever," since most of these morph into theories that governments are using secret alien technology to maintain their oppression. Plus there is the sheer ideological misgiving about keeping the aliens secret. UFO proponents bark incessantly for "disclosure." They believe they've found a secret and they want the people they accuse of keeping it simply to come clean about it.

I agree that for UFO believers the alleged aliens fill the Mentor or Protector archetype, and so act in the same capacity as deity or angels in a more traditional religious mythos. If you look at how the characterization of extraterrestrials evolves over time, the aliens always seem more adept at whatever social or moral difficulty we happen to face at the time.

One prominent researcher dealing with alleged contactees noted that the aliens -- who are presumed to be so much more technically advanced than we -- are unable to tell their Earthling contactees any information about their technology breakthroughs, but are oh-so-full of helpful moral and social advice.

 

[Halcyon Dayz]

Indeed I think the standard of effectiveness centers around exposure of the nefarious activity, not alleviation. In fact the sentiment, "There's nothing we can do to stop them!" factors into the mythos. But to belabor my previous point, the presumption is that the conspirators want their actions to be kept secret. Exposing them to the public is perceived to have a deleterious effect.

That's why have grown to actually dislike conspiracists.

They don't do anything.
They are not people who are going to help dealing with the many real world problems we need fixing. They are passive bystanders.
The kind of people "The Powers That Be" must just love, because they are no threat to them what-so-ever.

 

[LSSBB]

That's why have grown to actually dislike conspiracists.

They don't do anything.
They are not people who are going to help dealing with the many real world problems we need fixing. They are passive bystanders.
The kind of people "The Powers That Be" must just love, because they are no threat to them what-so-ever.

I don't know about that. When they actually do get around to doing something, they end up like Sovereign Citizens, Moorish Nationals and Freemen. At best clogging up the courts with nonsense. At worst, shooting at policemen or planning to kidnap them.

 

[kellyb]

I don't know about that. When they actually do get around to doing something, they end up like Sovereign Citizens, Moorish Nationals and Freemen. At best clogging up the courts with nonsense. At worst, shooting at policemen or planning to kidnap them.

That's not totally fair. A lot just hoard canned goods, toilet paper, and weapons in preparation for TEOTWAWKI.

 

[LSSBB]

That's not totally fair. A lot just hoard canned goods, toilet paper, and weapons in preparation for TEOTWAWKI.

True. If they also hide themselves, there could be a net benefit to society.

 

[kblood]

Please forgive me in the likely event that this thread is started in the wrong sub forum, but really where else could I place it? This thread is started to determine what motivates conspiracy theorists.

I see a lot of suggestions that conspiracy theorists are either unhinged or inadequately educated and I wonder if these back handed dismissals might be unfair or at the least too shallow to actually address the problem. And I wonder if it might be a deeper, underlying sociological problem that cause conspiracy theorists to be. If that's the case might there be something that we, as a society, might be able to do about it?

I eagerly await everyone's thoughtful replies.

Ask one of the best himself. Ian Crane.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HzrvQnLpg9I

Heres some stuff on The Project For The New American Century, which you ought to know about if you ever felt unsure what made 911 so suspicous. Building 7 also seemed a bit strange, and the two towers. But most of all, 911 was the first really big wake up call for the whole world.

And yet, so many still sleep without a second thought... because of words like "conspiracy theorists" and how they are obviously just refering to a bunch of cooks....