What did he mean by this?

>schizos gettin' triggered

>people who don't believe in al-Qaeda or drug cartels or other conspiracies

>just world theory faggot
I thought people here knew shit about history, and philosophy.

Don't agree with his claim, but his argument is completely straightforward. What part of it tripped you up?

To be clear, the part I disagree with is his reasoning on why people come up with conspiracy theories. I don't think they do it subconsciously to feel safe. Rather, I think they do it (along with moral panics both left and right) because it's more fun and exciting to imagine.

t. CIA

Nice strawman, retards.

>doesn't believe in the existence of conspiracies
>and all proven or popular conspiracies are straw-men

>calls other schizos without any explanations
>has the nerve to talk about strawmans
You should be killed on the spot

A conspiracy is a group of people working together in secret to achieve a goal.

So no, it's not a straw man. If you disagree with the idea of a "Jewish conspiracy" because you think Jews would never ever work together to achieve a mutual goal because people never ever work together to achieve a mutual goals then yes, you do have to not believe in Al-Qaeda or Drug Cartels.

>indeed there are a great number of conspiracies

Fucking retard.

>because people never ever work together to achieve a mutual goals

ur so rite dats not strawman hurr durr

How's it a strawman? He's pointing out that you said "I don't think people work together".

Maybe you should read the quote in the OP, friend.

>if you don't believe my specific schizophrenic nonsense, you must believe nobody ever lies about anything!

brilliant argument

>Bilderberg Group
>schizoprenic nonsense
yes the most rich powerful industrialists, bankers and politicians around the world having a meting behind closed doors without the press is totally not worth being suspicious about.

>baking conspiracy
>Good goy, here's some cake for you!

That actually is a really bad strawman.

Moore isn't talking about the little conspiracies, like two people agreeing to do an insider trade.
More is talking about the Grand Conspiracies: those that involve tens of thousands or millions of people and stretch over decades without being found out.

Grand conspiracies don't exist, and they can't exist, because they collapse very quickly, which has been studied with mathematical models that make the most generous assumptions possible and still have shattering results for conspiracy theorists.

A good theory, but I'm not 100% sure.

Some conspiracy theorists seem to have a symptom of schizophrenia and schizoid personality disorder where they are convinced minor details have pivotal importance. They fall prey to confirmation bias, a meme example might be thinking all triangles = illuminati. A real life example is this.

youtube.com/channel/UCBw80_1kFx_PwkcjvkiEuRg

Others seem to be h8ers and their hate fixates on the boogeymen of the conspiracy theory. I am not sure about the psychology behind hate either. Racism is a touchy issue and people come up with theories like they're jealous/insecure/compensating, I think they are leaping to conclusions out of shock at encountering people who hate them for no good reason, they might be biased in favor of portraying them as inferior in reaction to the h8ers declaring others are inferior, but there are plenty of people with disabilities and mental illness who don't become h8ers. A more well rounded explanation I have found is the frustration-aggression hypothesis.

www1.appstate.edu/~beckhp/aggfrustrationagg.htm

Though apparently this is an old theory and doesn't seem to be text book modern psychology.

>without being found out.
But they are quite open about this, you faggot.
I know I shouldn't expect anything from a animefag but this is just ridiculous. Newfags and redditors truly destroyed this place.

>But they are quite open about this

Link plz

The evidence for grand conspiracies never holds up to the extraordinary claims they make.

Here's one of the studies on the viability of conspiracies I mentioned:

Grimes DR (2016) On the Viability of Conspiratorial Beliefs. PLoS ONE 11(1): e0147905. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147905
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147905

If you read and understand it, and aren't uneducated/dumb/miseducated/too emotionally invested, you will see why grand conspiracies are just ridiculous.

Your move.

Also,
>But they are quite open about this, you faggot.
[citation needed]
For someone that clamors about other people ruining this place, you sure aren't trying to follow the rules that demand citations, despite it being clearly visible in the sticky at all times.

That paper proves pretty much every religion to be true.

The US air force deliberately promoted the UFO phenomenon in the 1960's/1970's to help cover up the development of B-2/F-117. A big part of the reason why UFO's stopped getting reported is that these aircraft were declassified and are now known to the general public.

>More is talking about the Grand Conspiracies: those that involve tens of thousands or millions of people and stretch over decades without being found out.

What happens when those tens of millions of people are not directed in a hierarchical manner but still act toward a unified goal due to the principle of emergence?

For example, there doesn't have to be a "grand conspiracy" among pedophiles for pedophiles to slowly push for the normalization and eventual legalization of pedophilia and yet the results are the same.

Is your problem just semantics?

>What happens when those tens of millions of people are not directed in a hierarchical manner but still act toward a unified goal due to the principle of emergence?

The word "conspiracy" typically denotes coordinated activity that is hidden or obfuscated. If it is being done in an open and blatant manner than it is not a conspiracy.

A frequent victim of online textual communication and it's common trend toward hyperbolic speech.

>What happens when those tens of millions of people are not directed in a hierarchical manner but still act toward a unified goal due to the principle of emergence?
That's not a conspiracy. More like a "social movement" or something.

nah, because there is no massive cover-up by those members. Whatever happened, happened a long time ago, by a select few initial leaders of the religion. Even if they intentionally conspired to promote that lie, and they specifically knew it was one, it's much easier to do it at that scale.

>If you disagree with the idea of a "Jewish conspiracy" because you think Jews would never ever work together to achieve a mutual goal
Zionism has been defined and practised by that name since the 19th century, though.