It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Look who is warning us again about the great harm conspiracy theories are doing to the minds of impressionable citizens everywhere: Cass Sunstein has emerged at Bloomberg, to once again plead for 'correction' of the many conspiracy theories that are disseminated on that pesky new medium, the intertubes, seemingly without inhibition. Contrary to the infamous paper in which he described how to precisely combat the spreading of false information that lacks the government's seal of approval, he doesn't list his favored censorship and disinformation techniques outright this time, but it is certainly implied that 'something must be done'.
Sunstein's recent Bloomberg article is quite interesting though in that it nicely demonstrates the demagogic techniques employed in advancing statist interests. One can immediately see that he has learned a few lessons from the push-back he received the first time around. As noted above, he refrains this time from telling us in detail what government should actually do in order to 'reduce the harm from conspiracy theories'.
He merely asserts that such harm exists, encouraging readers to think about how it might be reduced. He mentions in closing that 'we' need to “persuade the conspiracy theorists to find their way around to the truth”, but he doesn't say how.
Whenever an author invokes 'us', asserting that 'we' must do this or that, what he really means is actually that the government's apparatus of coercion and compulsion must be set into motion to attain certain goals the author approves of.
And this, in a nutshell, is what is really behind Mr. Sunstein's concern with 'conspiracy theories'. It is all about preserving the State's perceived right to rule by letting nothing intrude on the notion that politicians and bureaucrats are 'disembodied spirits solely devoted to the public good' rather than people who pursue their own personal interests.
Well, I hate to say this, but he does have a point. He's not completely 100% correct, but I think some of his statements are correct.
sheepslayer247
Well, I hate to say this, but he does have a point. He's not completely 100% correct, but I think some of his statements are correct.
There are many conspiracy theories that are born out of shear ignorance and desire for there to be a conspiracy. Many conspiracy theories are not rooted in any sort of facts and many defy common sense and logic.
There are some cases, such as Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, in which people went off the deep end and concocted theories that were outright insulting....and I would even say dangerous.
I think of myself as a skeptic, not a conspiracy theorist per se. I like to talk about odd theories and alternative views, but in the end I stay fairly close to what I find logical.
Sadly, there are many in the community that do not.
To be sure, some conspiracy theories turn out to be true. Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House, did, in fact, bug the Democratic National Committee's headquarters at the Watergate complex. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer '___' and related drugs to unknowing subjects in an effort to investigate the possibility of “mind control.” In 1947, space aliens did, in fact, land in Roswell, New Mexico, and the government covered it all up. (Well, maybe not.)
I don't think he is trying to confuse people at all. If you read the entire article it's actually a pretty good piece. He touches on many of the issues we have in the conspiracy community, including confirmation bias. I would add that the community also has a problem with accepting arguments of authority.
sheepslayer247
There are many conspiracy theories that are born out of shear ignorance and desire for there to be a conspiracy. Many conspiracy theories are not rooted in any sort of facts and many defy common sense and logic.
There are some cases, such as Sandy Hook and the Boston bombing, in which people went off the deep end and concocted theories that were outright insulting....and I would even say dangerous.
Argument from authority (Argumentum ab auctoritate), also authoritative argument and appeal to authority, is a common logical fallacy.[1]
Fallacious examples of using the appeal include[2][3] any appeal to authority used in the context of deductive reasoning, and appealing to the position of an authority or authorities to dismiss evidence.[4]
The appeal to authority is a logical fallacy[5] because authorities are not necessarily correct about judgments related to their field of expertise.[6] Though reliable authorities can be correct in judgments related to their area of expertise more often than laypersons,[citation needed] they can still come to the wrong judgments through error, bias, dishonesty, or falling prey to groupthink. Thus, the appeal to authority is not an argument for establishing facts.[6]
Bassago
reply to post by sheepslayer247
act. While I agree he touches on many / most of the issues we see here all the time that is not the intent of his writings at all. He is simply pushing the "tin-foil hats are crazy" and what should we do about it meme.
In a 2008 academic paper, President Barack Obama's appointee to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs advocated "cognitive infiltration" of groups that advocate "conspiracy theories" like the ones surrounding 9/11.
Cass Sunstein, a Harvard law professor, co-wrote an academic article entitled "Conspiracy Theories: Causes and Cures," in which he argued that the government should stealthily infiltrate groups that pose alternative theories on historical events via "chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine" those groups.
As head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Sunstein is in charge of "overseeing policies relating to privacy, information quality, and statistical programs," according to the White House Web site.
Obama staffer wants ‘cognitive infiltration’ of 9/11 conspiracy groups