Jump to content

Why are Conservatives more susceptible to believing conspiracy theories?


Luz P.

Recommended Posts

Let's start with 9/11. What makes you want to 'J'accuse' conservatives for that one?

Do you not remember flaming leftist Rosie O' Donnel's loud argument with the token conservative on morning far left trash TV loudly proclaiming 'STEEL DOESN'T MELT!' ?

You do remember it was a Republican in office during 9/11 and not a Democrat, don't you?

Wouldn't it kind of conflict with your stereotypes of conservatives as  Islamophobes to say all of a sudden Conservatives prefer a theory where a Republican administration is the bad guy over a pack of Islamo-fascist terrorists?

You may be confusing Conservatives with Libertarians there but you still can't be forgiven for that lie because it wasn't just them, it was the unequivocal left pushing 9/11 conspiracies. Also their Islamo-fascist buddies.

Some of your other examples though, are possibly examples of rational Conservatives not ignoring the obvious. The existence of what some call "the swamp" or what you call "the deep state" maneuvering behind the scenes, for example. You can feel free to sue me on that one. I'll believe my lying eyes. That exists.

Now shall we talk Russiagate or 10 to 20 more leftist conspiracy theories I can think of off the top of my head?

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come to think of it...it isn't just the right sympathetic to the idea of a "deep state."

When it suits your guys' politics you guys can get pretty deep statey too.

Here's one from the infamous Hollywood left, for instance...

Film director Oliver Stone doesn't want to believe a communist sympathizer could have been responsible for killing Kennedy:

"

John F Kennedy’s assassination was carried out by the secret service, according to a deathbed confession given to the veteran film director Oliver Stone.

The famed Hollywood movie maker claims he was told the US President ’s murder in 1963 was an inside job by a man who said he was a former member of the presidential security detail.?

Oliver Stone reveals who REALLY killed John F Kennedy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

Speaking of the Hollywood left's affection for 'deep state' theories when it suits their politics...

Ever seen Wag the Dog?

Relax, those just were some examples. Of course, conspiracy theorists exist on both sides of the aisle. However, in my experience you’re more likely to come across conservative keyboard warriors, intent on waking people up than liberals. 

That’s what I was referring to, perhaps not eloquently enough.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Luz P. said:

Of course, conspiracy theorists exist on both sides of the aisle. However, in my experience you’re more likely to come across conservative keyboard warriors, intent on waking people up than liberals. 

Fair enough, and in my experience depending on what you mean by "waking people up" you may not have a clue what you're talking about.

No offense. ;)

If you mean Conservatives are not adverse to observing the obvious and therefore more likely to notice what I've heard called "conspiracy fact," I'll walk the slur back though. You may be right.

However...I think it was WestCan Man who reamed off about 10 to 20 leftist conspiracy theories and hoaxes taken as fact on another thread. You know...as an example of which side of the aisle has a greater propensity to 'swallow the baloney,' so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Fair enough, and in my experience depending on what you mean by "waking people up" you may not have a clue what you're talking about.

No offense. ;)

If you mean Conservatives are not adverse to observing the obvious and therefore more likely to notice what I've heard called "conspiracy fact," I'll walk the slur back though. You may be right.

However...I think it was WestCan Man who reamed off about 10 to 20 leftist conspiracy theories and hoaxes taken as fact on another thread. You know...as an example of which side of the aisle has a greater propensity to 'swallow the baloney,' so to speak.

Everyone is susceptible to conspiracies, and some are interesting (fun) to ponder…

However, its conservatives the ones talking about The Illuminati, Satanism, Trump being a Godsend, etc.  When you mix religion with an attempt at critical thinking there’s bound to be a clash.  And from that perspective, conservatives come across a tad nuttier - no offense.   ; )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did you get the idea religion is a necessary component of conservativism or vice versa ? I'm agnostic. I know an atheist conservative.

I'm baffled by you suddenly focusing in on religion to paint Conservatives as conspiracy theorists. Religion is more often the victim. Conservative Ben Shapiro is a Jew. Are you thinking he spends nights worrying about the Jewish Banking Conspiracy or looking under his bed for evidence of Rothschild bugging equipment? 

Actually the illuminati have come and gone. A few internet nerds might entertain themselves trying to get a rise out of people with talk of them surviving in dark corners of politics. I doubt most of them are any kind of religious. Unless Trolling is a new religion.

The New World Order would be a thing for Libertarians to fuss over though. Conservatives in the larger part might worry about Globalism as you see it in places like the World Economic Forum but that wouldn't have anything to do with religion. More just evidence.

I don't know how you figure the other 2 examples you gave are "conspiracy theories."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/15/2022 at 8:46 PM, Infidel Dog said:

I don't know how you figure the other 2 examples you gave are "conspiracy theories."

 

All the examples I gave are listed as such in the Wikipedia link I provided as opening statement.

Also, I was very clear to say: IN MY EXPERIENCE, meaning that's what I've encountered in most social media sites I visit.  That's how Conservatives come across.  They do mention God a lot and whole-heartedly believe Trump is one of the "good ones"...

The fact you're not one of them makes you the exception to the rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Luz P. said:

All the examples I gave are listed as such in the Wikipedia link I provided as opening statement.

I scanned through that article. It seems to be more just evidence of the well known leftist bias of Wikipedia editors.

They'll pick a little bit from here and make sure nobody is able to post anything that might cast shade on the larger left favoring idea they're trying to push in the article. 

However, I couldn't find anything on this "Trump as Godsend" thing you were claiming. I don't see how it would be a conspiracy theory even if I could find it. 

Satanism wouldn't be a conspiracy theory. Satanism is a fact. It exists. Satanist  rituals or icons however might be attached to a conspiracy theory. I believe such things are connected to that College cult the Bushes were supposedly connected to. I believe it was called Blood and Bones or something like that.

But that would be a conspiracy theory leftists would be more connected to so I'd be surprised if it would make it past the leftist editors at Wikipedia.

Hey there's a conspiracy theory I'll be proud to stand behind. Leftist editors push Wikipedia left. Me and one of the original creators of Wikipedia support that conspiracy theory fact. Wikipedia has been propagandized  by leftist ideologues that have taken control of the editing process.

Now as to you wanting me to recognize something you feel as factual evidence of something thanks for the chuckle.

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But hey...

I did notice something I connected with on the little Wikipedia scan you had me do.

There used to be a forum for conspiracy theories. I believe it was called Above Top Secret. Is it still around? I'm not sure.

But I remember there was a category for "Global Warming." That one started out pushing the idea there was a conspiracy pushed by what they call " global warming deniers." However as the category began to fill with posts they pretty much had to notice the real conspiracy was the idea the world was coming to an inevitable end as a result of too much nice weather. When you point out what they're actually proposing this whole alleged "consensus" pushed in the original proposal goes poof.

There is no "97% consensus" of what they began calling "Climate Change" once you get them to admit what they're really pushing is a proposed, inevitable, calamitous catastrophe of human caused global warming. There is no convincing science of that. Don't forget the word "inevitable" if you choose to respond to that. This supposed 97 % consensus of such pushed by "Progressive" ideologues like Barrack Obama and Wikipedia is the actual conspiracy theory. A 97% consensus of a catastrophe of anthropogenic global warming is a  bogus "consensus." It doesn't exist. It's false, fake, a hoax, a conspiracy theory.

But don't think you'll ever get that fact past the leftist editors at Wikipedia.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Hey there's a conspiracy theory I'll be proud to stand behind. Leftist editors push Wikipedia left. Me and one of the original creators of Wikipedia support that conspiracy theory fact. Wikipedia has been propagandized  by leftist ideologues that have taken control of the editing process.

I believe most know MSM is left-leaning (unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past years) and the main reason why independent/alternative news outlets have risen to notoriety

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

I did notice something I connected with on the little Wikipedia scan you had me do.

---

There is no "97% consensus" of what they began calling "Climate Change" once you get them to admit what they're really pushing is a proposed, inevitable, calamitous catastrophe of human caused global warming. There is no convincing science of that. Don't forget the word "inevitable" if you choose to respond to that. This supposed 97 % consensus of such pushed by "Progressive" ideologues like Barrack Obama and Wikipedia is the actual conspiracy theory. A 97% consensus of a catastrophe of anthropogenic global warming is a  bogus "consensus." It doesn't exist. It's false, fake, a hoax, a conspiracy theory.

But don't think you'll ever get that fact past the leftist editors at Wikipedia.

 

Thanks for taking the time, much appreciated. 

EVERYONE is susceptible to conspiracy theories. However, I’m not going to lie, it bothers me that conservatives (for the most part) debate from a standpoint of superior certainty.  And BTW, I'm not a "leftist"...

I don’t trust Wikipedia, mainly because it’s easily edited. There’s no quality rigor as to what is posted there, but for a list of conspiracy theories, I’m ok referencing it.

There’s so much data on climate change, who holds the truth?

If you have the time, curiosity and inclination, I recommend you watch Daniel Schmachtenberger video: The War on Sensemaking, I found it very insightful.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The category "Conspiracy Theories" is precisely the sort of category Wikipedia's leftist editor managers would take control of to push the idea Conspiracies are property of the right.

I have a theory why.

I've noticed every time I buy a new car I'm surprised after I bought it to look around on the road and see how many cars like mine are out there.

Now those brands of cars didn't all of a sudden become more popular because I bought one. And I didn't buy one because it was popular. I'd never noticed them before the salesman convinced me I needed one. But then I did buy it and was surprised to discover there was so much support for my decision.

The leftist managing editors of Wikipedia take control and manage the Conspiracy Theory category to make it look like only Conservatives are interested in conspiracies because of what you said here:

"Also, I was very clear to say: IN MY EXPERIENCE, meaning that's what I've encountered in most social media sites I visit.  That's how Conservatives come across."

There's an agenda to make sure those susceptible notice the bits of conspiracies they want them to notice. And what I notice on social media is it's lefties pushing hard on the idea all or at least most conspiracy theories are property of the right. Doesn't matter that that's false. Once it's in your head Wiki will confirm how smart you think you are for noticing. Even though you noticed nothing. The thought was put there for you. Just like the friendly  car salesman did for me.

BTW the leftie managing editors of Wiki also have deep affection for the Global Warming  Climate Change category.

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Oh and cut the crap.

I read the title to this thread. I know what you're trying to push.

I'm asking a question which evidently you can't handle - I'm not pushing for anything, I'd like to understand the conservative mindset.

Yes, energy goes where attention goes. Perhaps by being exposed to the notion that conservatives are more susceptible to CT, I fall for confirmation bias and encounter it more. Fair enough!  But just like conservatives that fall for the "all democrats are pedophiles, satanists and degenerates".  Tell me it ain't so!

In addition, not only are Conservative more susceptible to CT, but they're the first ones to attack and name-call when they don't like what's said - just like you did.  And yes, that's IN MY EXPERIENCE, because that's how you form opinions.

BTW, instead of assuming, watch the video, you may learn something...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Luz P. said:

I'm asking a question which evidently you can't handle

No you're not. I'm not even going to read past that.

Let's see the title up close to make up our own minds:

"Why are Conservatives more susceptible to believing conspiracy theories?"

Now let's ask ourselves, is the person asking that question trying to push a point? Doesn't it seem like the person asking that question has already answered it for himself and with a little support would be all over the gloat of what he believes is his cleverness for bringing it up.? 

Sorry, pardoner. I won't be apologizing for heading you off that pass. 

BTW, in case you missed it, his title doesn't ask if you believe the claim. It assumes the truth of it then asks why that is. 

Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining, Bud.

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Infidel Dog said:

No you're not. I'm not even going to read past that.

Let's see the title up close to make up our own minds:

"Why are Conservatives more susceptible to believing conspiracy theories?"

Now let's ask ourselves, is the person asking that question trying to push a point? Doesn't it seem like the person asking that question has already answered it for himself and with a little support would be all over the gloat of what he believes is his cleverness for bringing it up.? 

Sorry, pardoner. I won't be apologizing for heading you off that pass. 

BTW, in case you missed it, his title doesn't ask if you believe the claim. It assumes the truth of it then asks why that is. 

Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining, Bud.

 

How would you have asked?  School me please...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

I wouldn't have made the assumption I knew the answer then tried to pretend I didn't do that or didn't have a horse in the race when it was made clear both propositions were false. You did that though.

I didn't make an assumption. IMO Conservatives are more susceptible to CT, especially since Trump entered the stage and manipulated them to gain votes.  Also, they're more belligerent.  How many times did you use the term "leftists" derisively?  The only "horse in the race" I have, is trying to figure out the conservative mind...  for example: why do conservatives get easily annoyed when a question they don't like is asked?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Not conservatives.

Some conservative politicians try to appeal to conspiracy theorists, hence the confusion.

Conspiracy theories used to be the domain of the left, see the JFK assassination.

Ever heard of Adam Schiff? Spoiler, he's not conservative. 

Never met a Prog flavored conspiracy he didn't want to push though. What about Russiagate? Ever heard of that one? Adam did. Big time. Every day for a year on CNN.

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No.

It bothers me to see you walk around ignorant of something you should know if you want to join a discussion on conspiracy theories so try these two from this morning:

How many more times will Adam Schiff claim to have the goods on Trump?

Quote

Speaking of conspiracy theories, Adam Schiff is the man who said in March 2017 that he had personally seen “more than circumstantial evidence” that President Trump and his team had colluded with Russians to influence the 2016 election.

That was a lie, but as chairman of the secrecy-shrouded House Intelligence Committee, Schiff was able to continue to repeat this lie for years, intentionally misleading Americans about the then-president of the United States.

and 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    RevolutionPartyofCanada
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Mentor
    • Matthew went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Matthew earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • User went up a rank
      Veteran
    • PoliFile earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...