the sheer level of human incompetence and inefficiency in any large-scale operation also works against lots of conspiracy theories. the larger the scale and the more organizations involved, real life tells you it's less likely it will be to pull off what's required.
it's true.that's certainly not true. the more technical the topic, the more difficult it is for a non-expert to arrive at an informed opinion, but most things are pretty easily the grasp of anyone who wants to put in the time and effort. the better documented something is - which generally coincides with how popular conspiracy theorizing about it is - the easier it is to track down to track down original claims. the difference is in learning about something to try to arrive at an informed opinion, or at least trying to be aware of your preconceptions about it, and to put it in your words, looking for information to bolster a position.
there doesn't need to a center for some things to be more likely than other things
What are they victims of, though? Besides a delusion?with todays vaccine news there's a lot of very boring smug classist craic on social media laughing at anti-vax 'karens', a kind of victim-blaming in a way
Like the UK's "world-beating" test, track and trace system, that's cost 12 billion quid and has been almost a complete failure?Large scale operations are notable for how competent they are. They're brilliant at logistics .
Like the UK's "world-beating" test, track and trace system, that's cost 12 billion quid and has been almost a complete failure?
I'd have to actually read it, but as a person who knows a fair bit about the ppl around JFK and LBJ - who, let's be clear, were the same ppl (there was a gradual exodus of Kennedy loyalists and as time went on, Vietnam doubters, but the key ppl all remained until at least 66 or 67) - I would be curious to know who exactly he points to, and more importantly, how they achieved it. even with a small group of actual conspirators both getting it done and especially covering it up would be so difficult and require the collusion of so many people that it's difficult to believe better evidence of it would not have been produced by now. these are the same people that back the country into Vietnam in the most incompetent and self-delusional way possible. (also anyone who knows anything about LBJ will have a hard time believing that, even with his many flaws, he would have ordered the assassination of JFK - for one thing he didn't have those kinds of guts)As an aside, re. JFK the only thing I've ever read on it is a little book by Robin Ramsey, who is a JFK expert, and actually has read all the literature. He thinks LBJ dunnit and identifies the shooter etc. His hypothesis fits perfectly with the idea you describe - it's the inverse in fact. He points to a very small number of people around LBJ as being responsible, a classic small style conspiracy.
I did not. I understood it perfectly. I disagree with it wholeheartedly.You've missed the point I was making
I did not. I understood it perfectly. I disagree with it wholeheartedly.
there is a difference between saying there is no received wisdom vs in the kingdom of no certainties all claims are equally meaningless.
bro you have nothing original to say on this topic everNo, you misunderstood it
there's a difference in the kinds of competency large organizations do and don't achieve
the U.S. govt of the 60s was literally the best in the world at rapidly delivering huge numbers of men and material to a given location
it was extremely bad at maintaining secrecy about policy decisions, which it very much wanted to
being good at logistics is very different from being good at controlling information
no one ever ultimately "knows" anything. everything in life is something you choose to believe based on yr own critical facultiesThis is something you can choose to believe but the nature of secrecy means it's not something you can know.