What you say is logical, however it is not as simple as that. Rational and accurately documented positions can be labeled as "conspiracy theories" if they do not conform to the official or politically correct narrative. Conversely, the fact that something is official confers to it some legitimacy. An interesting example of that is the NIST report of the collapse of the three WTC towers on 9/11. Despite the egregious inaccuracies of its methodology and conclusions that have been identified (and disproved empirically) by a number of engineers and research scientists (including ex NIST scientists who worked on the report themselves!) the former gains its credibility from the government seal of approval whereas the latter are ridiculed as conspiracy theorists.
The whole field of influence, propaganda and psychological manipulation makes for fascinating investigation indeed, regardless of whether one personally believes that Martians are conspiring to enslave planet Earth or that our governments couldn't possibly tell any lies.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I see what you're saying. Every idea should be evaluated on its own merits, regardless of its popularity, endorsement, and (to a certain extent) civility. I agree.
I like how you expressed it so clearly :-)