A conspiracy theorist is anyone who believes that any person in the course of human history has ever conspired. You have a theory that someone conspired. That is the dictionary definition. Perhaps better put as being ABLE to theorize that people conspire.
Conspiracy theorist is a weaponized phrase that uses a sort of fallacy of equivocation like other weaponized phrases (racist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc.) whereby you take a denotation of a mundane and normal activity that you dont want your controlled population to engage in, in this case theorizing that people are conspiring, and associating it and using it interchangeably with a connotation that is somehow absurd or looked down upon, in this case a paranoid person who thinks that everything is a conspiracy or that the moon is made of cheese. Then you simply propounded this into the public's consciousness repeatedly conditioning them to associate thinking people are conspiring with lunacy, mental derangement and absurd. Thereby you have made it so the 90% of your population that accepts conditioning from your authority blindly will never think of people conspiring. You have essentially deleted this idea from their mind. Down the Orwell memory hole. Next week we'll take a look at how "racist" is just the same thing where a person understands biology 101 where by different populations of a common species separated for long enough periods of time under different evolutionary pressures will diverge into different subspecies or even entirely new species with different characteristics. Then you conflate this understanding of differences with hatred, where you do not accept the possibility that people could recognize inherent differences and not hate those differences. Notice how the church of progressivism constantly reduces agreements to HATE vs LOVE, further reinforcing this unquestioning obedience to liberal doctrine.
Ironically liberalism teaches that differences in people should NOT be met with hatred and yet their argument against race realism presupposes that you must hate people you see as different than you which is why we cant talk about or study racial differences as it can only bring about hatred. This is a very simply and straight forward contradiction that they are not aware of. Point this out to anyone who is not a race realist, slowly walking them point by point, asking rhetorical questions and backing them into logical corners example:
Me: Should differences in people be hated?
NPC: No, of course not.
Me: Do you think humans are capable of acknowledging differences and yet not hating those differences?
NPC: Of course, I personally celebrate differences, I dont hate them so yes humans can do it.
Me: Ok I agree. There are many scientists, such as the father of modern genetics, James Watson, who say that science shows inherent differences in human races such as temperament, intelligence, personality, physical attributes, etc. Why or why shouldn't this type of scientific inquiry be allowed?
NPC: It shouldn't be allowed because it would make people hate others unlike them.
Me: But you just said that differences should be celebrated. That diversity in humans is a good thing and that people are mature enough to acknowledge differences and not hate? But now you say that differences invariable cause hate? Do you see how that is an impossible contradiction. Either differences must be hated or their is no inherent hate in studying differences.
view the rest of the comments →
Nonchalant ago
A conspiracy theorist is anyone who believes that any person in the course of human history has ever conspired. You have a theory that someone conspired. That is the dictionary definition. Perhaps better put as being ABLE to theorize that people conspire.
Conspiracy theorist is a weaponized phrase that uses a sort of fallacy of equivocation like other weaponized phrases (racist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc.) whereby you take a denotation of a mundane and normal activity that you dont want your controlled population to engage in, in this case theorizing that people are conspiring, and associating it and using it interchangeably with a connotation that is somehow absurd or looked down upon, in this case a paranoid person who thinks that everything is a conspiracy or that the moon is made of cheese. Then you simply propounded this into the public's consciousness repeatedly conditioning them to associate thinking people are conspiring with lunacy, mental derangement and absurd. Thereby you have made it so the 90% of your population that accepts conditioning from your authority blindly will never think of people conspiring. You have essentially deleted this idea from their mind. Down the Orwell memory hole. Next week we'll take a look at how "racist" is just the same thing where a person understands biology 101 where by different populations of a common species separated for long enough periods of time under different evolutionary pressures will diverge into different subspecies or even entirely new species with different characteristics. Then you conflate this understanding of differences with hatred, where you do not accept the possibility that people could recognize inherent differences and not hate those differences. Notice how the church of progressivism constantly reduces agreements to HATE vs LOVE, further reinforcing this unquestioning obedience to liberal doctrine.
Nonchalant ago
Ironically liberalism teaches that differences in people should NOT be met with hatred and yet their argument against race realism presupposes that you must hate people you see as different than you which is why we cant talk about or study racial differences as it can only bring about hatred. This is a very simply and straight forward contradiction that they are not aware of. Point this out to anyone who is not a race realist, slowly walking them point by point, asking rhetorical questions and backing them into logical corners example:
Me: Should differences in people be hated? NPC: No, of course not. Me: Do you think humans are capable of acknowledging differences and yet not hating those differences? NPC: Of course, I personally celebrate differences, I dont hate them so yes humans can do it. Me: Ok I agree. There are many scientists, such as the father of modern genetics, James Watson, who say that science shows inherent differences in human races such as temperament, intelligence, personality, physical attributes, etc. Why or why shouldn't this type of scientific inquiry be allowed? NPC: It shouldn't be allowed because it would make people hate others unlike them. Me: But you just said that differences should be celebrated. That diversity in humans is a good thing and that people are mature enough to acknowledge differences and not hate? But now you say that differences invariable cause hate? Do you see how that is an impossible contradiction. Either differences must be hated or their is no inherent hate in studying differences.