Quote:
Originally Posted by Matata
I think it's a bit disingenuous to to equate all conspiracies, I think there is a lot of weight to banker and military industrial complex conspiracies, seeing as these people have the greatest motivation and ability to pull off conspiracies. Most people will agree that bankers and oligarchs are evil and serve their own interests, but when you try and get into the minutia of their goals and tactics, people are awful quick to start throwing out tinfoil hat accusations.
For example, it's not too hard to convince someone that the petro dollar has been the primary influence of US foreign policy, but trying to break it down any further than that and you'll quickly find yourself branded as a conspiracy nut.
|
I think this is because you don't need the conspiracy for the actions to make sense. If everyone simply acts in self interest the outcomes are very likely to occur.
For example gas price fixing is not generally done. It's a bunch of people acting in self interest and a small number of people controlling the supply. Regular economics explain it.
The same is true with many of the world order conspiracies. They just aren't neccessary to explain the outcomes. The Iraq war wasn't started to make money geopolitics led to the Iraq war the companies jump in to make money. You don't need to start wars as they occur regularly given politics and human nature.
Conspiracy theories in general are a failure to apply Occam's razor or Hanlans razor.