Politics · Society

The Benefits of Conspiratorial Thinking

One of the biggest problems of normies is that they are seemingly unable to question anything. They believe what’s in the news. If something is printed in a book, it’s even more authoritative, and if they hear a lie often enough, they swallow it hook, line, and sinker. Of course, there are clear intellectual limitations. You just won’t get someone who is barely intelligent enough to exploit the Western welfare state to think about any kind of complex system, be it political or otherwise. On the other hand, there are also highly adjusted normies with high IQs who don’t question anything. They accept even the most ludicrous ideas, no matter how much they clash with reality.

If you have a modicum of self-awareness, you probably do not want to be a useful idiot. Training your ability to reason critically is not necessarily easy as society is geared towards making you accept the official narrative. Of course, should the official narrative change, you’re supposed to change your opinion as well. For instance, about a decade ago mainstream opinion in Germany was that multiculturalism has failed. If you say this publicly today, however, the police may show up and raid your house.

There are some approaches for sharpening your critical reasoning skills. For the more technically inclined, doing a bit of proof-based mathematics or computer programming would be a good starting point. However, just because you can reason formally does not necessarily mean that you are a critical thinker. That being said, knowing the difference between a necessary and a sufficient condition or understanding logical contradictions is very helpful. Only a vanishing minority of people grasps theses concepts. Just check mainstream news media, and, for instance, marvel at those idiots who argue for open borders and a generous welfare state at the same time. Their stupidity beggars belief.

I have found that conspiracy theories provide a great mental workout for your critical reasoning facilities. You can even look at downright ridiculous ones like flat-earthers or the anti-vaccination crowd. Look at their arguments and try to thoroughly refute them. Some of them are seemingly sophisticated, while others can be dismissed very easily. The anti-vaccers believe there is a conspiracy of Big Pharma and governments to cover up that vaccinations cause autism. How would you argue against that? Think of multiple approaches and work out and argument. It may be helpful to sketch an argument in writing, in bullet-point form, as opposed to just briefly thinking about it and dismiss it.

What is helpful to know is that the label “conspiracy theory” is also an attempt by the mainstream to stigmatize legitimate criticism. The world of politics is full of cover-ups. Reading up on the assassination of John F. Kennedy is a good example. A great starting point is the single-bullet theory of the official narrative, which just reeks of bullshit. Quite recently, I looked into the moon-landing hoax conspiracy theory. The main claim is that we never went to the moon. At first, this sounds completely ridiculous and you may want to dismiss those people right away. However, as I looked more into it, I came across some problems with the official narrative. Now, don’t get me wrong: I do think that the United States sent astronauts to the moon. However, there are some parts of the official record that don’t fully convince me. For instance, when I looked at high-resolution images of the lunar lander of the Apollo 11 mission, I was baffled that it looked like a cheap prop. It looks like a practical joke because it has been so shoddily manufactured. This is not what quality engineering looks like. A minor issue is that there are images supposedly taken on the moon that shows perpendicular shadows as opposed to parallel ones, which looks odd. Then there are images that were most likely manipulated.

What I found least convincing about the Apollo missions, now that I’ve spent some time reading up on claims put forward by “truthers” as well as further background information, is that NASA sent astronauts right through the supposedly deadly Van Allen radiation belt. This was a main reason why the Russians, who were ahead of the United States in the space race for years, never sent anybody to the moon. There is recent feedback from ISS astronauts according to which the Van Allen belt is even more powerful than they thought. Yet, the US sent a bunch of dudes right through it. There is a peculiar video with Neil Armstrong where he reacts in a befuddled manner when it is pointed out to him that he travelled through the radioactive Van Allen belt. At first, he looks genuinely confused, but he regains composure quickly and said that it must not have been a problem then.

The previous examples are, by itself, hardly proof that the US did not send anybody to the moon. However, they point to insufficiencies in the official narrative. Sometimes, they are just that: insufficiencies. Sometimes, however, that kind of narrative insufficiency is a clear deficiency, which may point to a much bigger problem with the official narrative. In other words: it may be false. In any case, you’ve worked out your critical reasoning skills and therefore you’re a bit less gullible than you were before. To get you started, you may want to first read up on exposed conspiracies and cover-ups, such as Watergate, or various CIA operations such as COINTELPRO and MKULTRA. Edward Snowden also did great work in exposing the evil machinations of the US intelligence agencies. The point of this exercise is to realize that governments are engaged in a lot of shady activities. They also actively lie to the population. Governments will keep lying to their populations, but as a critical thinker, you’ll not fall for their bullshit. You’ll also fall for less bullshit in general.

Did you enjoy this article? Excellent! If you want to read more by Aaron, check out his excellent books, the latest of which is Meditation Without Bullshit.
Aaron is available for one-on-one consultation sessions if you want honest advice.
Lastly, donations for the upkeep of this site are highly welcome.

11 thoughts on “The Benefits of Conspiratorial Thinking

  1. I think there are at least two events where the official narrative is solid bullshit. 9/11 and of course the 6 million gassed ten-four-double-u’s.
    And frankly, the more I ask the question “who benefits?”, the more things become scary.

    1. Of course, but let’s not forget that question any aspect of Jewish behavior means that you are an antisemite. I chuckled when I learned that the article on dubious Jewish behavior on Wikipedia is called “antisemitic canard”, i.e. no matter how much Jews conspire and corrupt society, you’d be wrong to point it out because it’s all just a rumor. Even though Jews run large parts of Hollywood, the porn industry, mass media, academia, and banking, nothing they do can be criticized.

      By the way, it’s quite interesting to look into the history of the six-million figure. It turns out it has some kind of mythical significance for religious Jews. Thus, this particular number has been mentioned in the media over and over well before the Nazis put up concentration camps. Needless to say, I don’t question the official Holocaust narrative, not one bit, because our government would never lie to us.

      1. I’ve tried raising very simple things like the issue of the cremation timing to people around me and I have pointed out that the math just doesn’t add up. You don’t just burn all those allegedly gassed bodies with six ovens, given one cremation takes two hours.
        But, needless to say, nobody wants to even think this through.
        Cognitive dissonance seems to be a heck of a force.

    1. I watched both videos and greatly enjoyed them. That several big banks have had massive losses recently seems to support his claims. However, one part where I raised my eyebrows was his claim about quantum computing rendering security void. Quantum computing is, from what I can tell, utter bullshit. That does not mean that our financial system is not close to collapsing. I particularly liked his take on zombie companies as it’s an aspect of modern voodoo economics that hardly ever gets addressed. We likewise have many ‘zombie private households’. There is certainly a bomb waiting to explode. It’s quite obvious when you look at debt levels in industrialized countries. For instance, there will be a lot of personal bankruptcies in Germany once interest rates rise again.

      1. Glad you liked them.
        I like that he sticks out his head and actually names a date.
        So let’s see if the central banks can kick the can down the road one more year or so before the bomb explodes.
        I’m actually tempted to buy some put options on the DAX. I might have to overpay for the maturity because who knows what they’ll pull out of their sleeve to postpone the inevitable bang.

      2. I wouldn’t be surprised by a 2020 financial crisis in the least. We all know it’s overdue. It’s coming. It should have already happened, yet I wouldn’t be surprised if a United States and global recession was strategically timed before the 2020 U.S. election somehow.

      3. I would not be surprised either. The Deep State is in a sheer state of panic and scrambling to prevent the reelection of Trump. It is quite staggering how much has been leaked recently. While it was always obvious that Google, Facebook, and Twitter are heavily biased against conservative points of view, now there have been insiders at all those companies spilling the beans.

      4. “The Deep State is in a sheer state of panic and scrambling to prevent the reelection of Trump”

        Do you really think that Trump is any different?
        The Deep State, I mean the real Deep State… he isn’t touching it. Last time I checked the Fed, the CIA and the entire military industrial complex are alive and kicking.

        Trump is just another puppet.

      5. I don’t think that Trump lived up to any hopes in a return to sanity, which his election campaign may have given rise to, he is much more problematic for the Deep State than Hillary would have been. The Epstein case is a great case in point as that guy was legally untouchable under Clinton and Obama. Presumably, Bill Clinton’s many trips on the “lolita express” are a suitably good explanation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.