Quote from: Bind on June 22, 2011, 08:06:21 AM

I have no doubt you disbelieve it.

Disbelieve in what eactly ?

Your claims cover the usual misanthropic spectrum of conspiracism, everything from musings on superstition to mass indoctrination, from the nefarious underpinnings of media to schooling and advertising, from your parents being willingly credulous consumers of propaganda to the United Nations being . . . well being something (typically the case is not made only alluded to), from the Club of Rome to Luciferians, from the Freemasons to . . . well just about everything is involved in this vast and insidious all pervasive conspiracy.

My main interest (and criticism) is the methodology employed to arrive at and to hold on to these ideas - the sheer contempt for others who might hold differing views, contempt regularly drifting over into misanthropy, and the simplistic dichotomies/trichotomies conspiracy theorists tend to divide the world into (which often sees them march headlong into straw man arguments) - think of it as a kind of intellectual curiosity, a kind of social anthropological interest rather than an exercise in proving or disproving your various conspiracy notions.

Quote from: Bind on June 22, 2011, 08:06:21 AM

99% of the worlds population either does not know about it or disbelieves it.

Again, for clarity, you've not stated what 'it' is, but I will read it as a 'vast and secretive web of deceit' know only to a small band of unusually insightful 'truthers' bravely sounding the alarm for all mankind ?

Quote from: Bind on June 22, 2011, 08:06:21 AM

I truly envy you disbelievers. It would make life so much easier to blanketly disbelieve without the formality of fact and evidence to back it up. Unshakable faith in your leaders and governments and their controllers is a wonderful thing. I used to have it and it was glorious.

Here we have the first (I would guess of many) false dichotomies (and it's corollary straw man argument):

If someone disagrees or challenges your ideas they are immediately labelled as mindless automaton who credulously accept the word of their 'controllers', anyone who might question some of your ideas have unshakable faith in their leaders - and have no evidence to back up their position.

Quote from: Bind on June 22, 2011, 08:06:21 AM

Once researched for yourself and accepted, we can then educate others, help them on their path to research and acceptance, then we can prepare. To me its all about preparation. Teaching my family the truth so they can accept and prepare appropriately in case the shit hits the fan.

Here we have another 2 stalwarts of conspiracism, firstly the 'research device' - regardless of what opinions the conspiracy theorists comes up against he (or she) can simply brush them aside by explaining that they simply need to do more research, you don't believe my claims ? Then you just need to keep researching until you do ! And secondly the looming threat alluded to here (be prepared . . . we never know when the shit will hit the fan) - all branches of magical thinking tend to have a great happening, an epoch changing event as part of their canon (a revolution, a great awakening, a rapture, the return of the 12th Imam, a global war . . .etc) and there tends to be two universals to these great happenings, the first is that the event will happen in the lifetime of the subscriber to the idea and the second is that he (or she) will be on the 'winning' or 'righteous' side.

Quote from: Bind on June 22, 2011, 08:06:21 AM

They need to keep us happy. Bailouts, interest rate changes, quantative easing, social programs, assistance, welfare, you name it, whatever it takes they will do it to keep us happy so long as we have the right to keep and bear arms, because otherwise you have 300 million people who are armed and have nothing, thus nothing left to lose.

Here in the UK we have no right to bear arms and yet we have all those measures in place (bailouts, interest rate changes, quantitative easing, social programs . . .etc) - The same can be said of most countries, in light of this, perhaps your notion that the right to bear arms is causally related to these measures might be wrong ?