Conspiracy Theories & Democracy

Yithian

Parish Watch
Staff member
Joined
Oct 29, 2002
Messages
32,771
Reaction score
40,629
Points
309
Location
East of Suez
This Bolivian material has been moved to its own dedicated thread in Mainstream News:

https://forums.forteana.org/index.php?threads/a-coup-in-bolivia.66611/

This thread is intended for a conceptual study of the susceptibility of democracies to conspiracy theories and their deleterious effects, not the specifics of particular coups and revolutions.
 

kamalktk

Antediluvian
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
5,847
Reaction score
9,720
Points
294
qanon goes time travelling.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-a-trash-talking-upstart-infuriated-qanon-boomers

"Steinbart initially said he was just following QAnon clues. More recently, though, he’s claimed that he actually is Q. How does that make sense? Well... time travel.

In Steinbart’s telling, Q is Steinbart from the future, who’s traveled back in time to leave present-day Steinbart clues."
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
2,568
Reaction score
4,073
Points
154
qanon goes time travelling.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-a-trash-talking-upstart-infuriated-qanon-boomers
"Steinbart initially said he was just following QAnon clues. More recently, though, he’s claimed that he actually is Q. How does that make sense? Well... time travel. In Steinbart’s telling, Q is Steinbart from the future, who’s traveled back in time to leave present-day Steinbart clues."
This is far and away the most cogent and plausible answer to the question "who is Q" that I have heard to date.
 

Tribble

Killjoy Boffin
Joined
Apr 21, 2015
Messages
2,992
Reaction score
6,873
Points
209
Steinbart—dubbed “Baby Q” by his fans—claimed he could get away with anything because he was a super-spy for Trump. In online arguments, Steinbart insisted he should have been arrested “100 times over” for his actions. And the fact that he hadn’t been arrested for, say, threatening to kill the Queen of Denmark was proof that Trump had given him immunity from prosecution.

“Seems like I should have been ARRESTED by now, eh?” Steinbart tweeted to one of his foes in late March, adding a sarcastic thinking-face emoji.

A few days later, FBI agents arrested him.


https://www.thedailybeast.com/baby-qanon-was-just-arrested
 

marhawkman

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
530
Reaction score
498
Points
64
Lol, #1 rule of being a spy: don't out yourself.
 

uair01

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Messages
3,068
Reaction score
3,717
Points
184
Location
Rotterdam
Worse (and this part of the story should be tattooed on the heads of Russia truthers), the FBI’s interviews of Steele’s sources revealed Steele embellished the most explosive parts of his report.

The “pee tape” story, which inspired countless grave headlines (see this chin-scratching New York Times history of Russian “sexual blackmail”) and plunged the Trump presidency into crisis before it began, was, this source said, based a “conversation that [he/she] had over beers,” with the sexual allegations made… in “jest”!

Steele in his report said the story had been “confirmed” by senior, Western hotel staff, but the actual source said it was all “rumor and speculation,” never confirmed. In fact, charged by Steele to find corroboration, the source could not: corroboration was “zero,” writes Horowitz

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...s-media-924944/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
 

Mikefule

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
727
Reaction score
2,453
Points
149
Location
Lincolnshire UK
How prescient the opening post of this thread turned out to be.

From the time that the candidates were being selected for the last US election onwards, political debate has shifted its emphasis from different interpretations of, and reactions to, a broad consensus on the objective facts and figures, to a situation in which the sides are saying, to paraphrase Groucho Marx, "These are my facts, and if you don't like them, I have others."

There is an important difference between "conspiracy theory" and "the theory that there is a conspiracy." It is self evident that conspiracies sometimes happen, and that sometimes "conspiracy" is a valid theory to explain a given set of circumstances or events. However, the "conspiracy theorist" is predisposed to look for and believe in conspiracies in preference to considering the facts and evidence dispassionately.

It is natural human behaviour for politicians and parties to attempt to conceal or distort unfavourable facts; for big business to try to subvert the regulatory process; and for an "establishment" to tend to preserve itself in the face of challenges. This is only the same instinct as an iron age tribe building a hill fort to keep its people and livestock safe from other tribes. This is not the same as saying that there is an overarching conspiracy and that the world is being run from behind the scenes by a mysterious cabal of faceless men in grey suits — whether from Harvard, Eton, the Masons or the Illuminati.

However, when we reach a situation in which politicians can flatly deny established facts in the face of evidence, and cry "conspiracy" without presenting evidence to support it, democracy suffers. I fear the west — led by the USA — is moving into a period in which alleging "conspiracy" or "fake news" is seen as a legitimate basis for dismissing any evidence that is deemed unfavourable.

If this continues, the whole basis for rational political debate and carefully considered voting goes straight out of the window, and with it, democracy. We have fought wars in the last few decades to promote western-style democracy. However, we don't display it to best advantage.
 
Last edited:

dr wu

Doctor Prog
Joined
Mar 12, 2002
Messages
2,368
Reaction score
1,843
Points
184
Location
Indiana
I watched the first episode of Van Der Walk the other night..in the show he said, 'All politicians should be shot'.
A bit drastic but after all the crap in my country lately I understand the feeling..
.;)
 
Last edited:

Cochise

Priest of the cult of the Dog with the Broken Paw
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
6,711
Reaction score
9,172
Points
284
However, when we reach a situation in which politicians can flatly deny established facts in the face of evidence, and cry "conspiracy" without presenting evidence to support it, democracy suffers. I fear the west — led by the USA — is moving into a period in which alleging "conspiracy" or "fake news" is seen as a legitimate basis for dismissing any evidence that is deemed unfavourable.

If this continues, the whole basis for rational political debate and carefully considered voting goes straight out of the window, and with it, democracy.
To be honest, I think that has been the situation for at least two decades. And the media are complicit, because extremes sell.

Obviously getting in to particular cases would be invidious and against the rules, but I bet everyone who has followed politics can think of blatant lies from politicians - not half truths, or economical with the truth, but blatant lies - that have poisoned the well over that period. We might not all think of the _same_ politicians :)
 
Top