I do not question the existence of conspiracies. :-))
If you and I plan something behind Hazel's back to her harm, we are conspirators. Big deal.
Perhaps to avoid rambling, I can narrow it to the most current internet discussions on the matter, relating to govenrments and secrets. Religion, wjhile often a conspiracy, introduces a few more complicating elements as well. :-))
I said originally,
ANYONE WHO THINKS THERE IS SOME CADRE OF MEN SOMEWHERE THAT CAN ESCAPE THIS PROCESS IS TOTALLY DECEIVED. That's it! SOMEONE will expose it, especially nowadays!
Nowadays is the key. New conspiracies will, of course, develop and control people forever no doubt, but they will be significantly more complex than the current spate of rednecks. Backwaters, where information is not freely disseminated, will suffer a much longer paralysis. :-))
I know it's hard to get my point because we look at history from our own perspective. Perhaps it is helpful to imagine one born in 2000 and how he/she will see it work out by 2100. People will remain basically the same. Rules of interaction and tolerances will be much different.
Randy
Perhaps CONSPIRACISM is a better word?
Conspiracism
A world view that centrally places conspiracy theories in the unfolding of history is sometimes termed "conspiracism". The historian Richard Hofstadteraddressed the role of paranoia and conspiracism throughout American history in his essay The Paranoid Style in American Politics, published in 1964.Bernard Bailyn's classic The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution (1967) notes that a similar phenomenon could be found in America during the time preceding the American Revolution. [6] The term conspiracism was popularized by academic Frank P. Mintz in the 1980s. Academic work in conspiracy theories and conspiracism presents a range of hypotheses as a basis of studying the genre. Among the leading scholars of conspiracism are: Hofstadter, Karl Popper, Michael Barkun, Robert Alan Goldberg, Daniel Pipes, Mark Fenster, Mintz, Carl Sagan, George Johnson, and Gerald Posner.
According to Mintz, conspiracism denotes: "belief in the primacy of conspiracies in the unfolding of history": [7]
"Conspiracism serves the needs of diverse political and social groups in America and elsewhere. It identifies elites, blames them for economic and social catastrophes, and assumes that things will be better once popular action can remove them from positions of power. As such, conspiracy theories do not typify a particular epoch or ideology". [8]
Throughout human history, political and economic leaders genuinely have been the cause of enormous amounts of death and misery, and they sometimes have engaged in conspiracies while at the same time promoting conspiracy theories about their targets. Hitler and Stalin would be merely the most prominent examples; there have been numerous others. [9] In some cases there have been claims dismissed as conspiracy theories that later proved to be true. (for examples, see "Conspiracies vs. conspiracy theories") [10] [11] The idea that history itself is controlled by large long-standing conspiracies is rejected by historian Bruce Cumings:
"But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities." [12]
The term conspiracism is used in the work of Michael Kelly, Chip Berlet, and Matthew N. Lyons.
According to Berlet and Lyons, "Conspiracism is a particular narrative form of scapegoating that frames demonized enemies as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good, while it valorizes the scapegoater as a hero for sounding the alarm". [13]
...OUTLAW