As I mentioned in the previous post, a good conspiracy theory requires delineations of both the motivation of the conspirators and the internal logic of how the plan would proceed.
That motivation, which would inspire most conspirators in their efforts, is the love of money coupled with the love of power.Â Â The Holy Bible states: â€œThe love of money is the root of all evilâ€.Â Lord Acton wrote: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”
But what can be said about the internal logic of a good conspiracy theory?
Many persons who imagine conspiracy theories have good basic ideas but they fail to outline the internal logic that would allow that design to be brought into reality.Â Those who do include structural logic in their ideas often fail to give their ideas a proper analysis.Â Proper analysis is necessary in order to determine weak portions of the logic.
One must theorize first, but then one must objectively analyze the theory that one has created.Â Then one must reconstruct the theory taking into accounts the weaknesses that were discovered in the analysis.Â Then one analyzes the new theory for weaknesses.Â The process must be iterated until one has a theory that appears to have no weaknesses.
A good conspiracy theory begins with the delineation of a goal.Â The goal can be an end in itself or it can be the completion of a step in a greater overall strategy.
The goal may be control over a certain public asset.Â Gaining the authorization to drill for oil on public lands for private profit would be an example of this.
The goal may be control over a certain public policy issue.Â Health insurance companies gained control over the national health care debate in the United States.Â This was a tremendous example of setting and achieving the goal of control over a national public policy issue.
The health insurance industry, working through its members in Congress, gutted the health care legislation and transformed it into a gift for itself.Â For a more detailed explanation of this, please see the separate post entitled â€œCase Study: The Health Insurance Industryâ€.
After the goal is defined, one must determine a set of steps that will move the desired item from its current state to the desired â€œgoalâ€ state.Â Each step follows logically from the preceding step and logically leads to the following step.
If one wants to pass a law that the public will not accept, then one must create a circumstance that elicits a certain reaction (asking for the passage of that law) from the public.Â If one wants to receive a certain reaction from the public, then one must introduce a stimulus to the public that will cause the desired reaction.Â One works backward then to determine the step that will cause the stimulus to occur.Â Then one works backward through steps until one has a plan to move the public agenda from the current state to the desired state.
You may recognize this strategy as being part of the Hegelian dialectic.Â The dialectical manner of reasoning is part of all good conspiracy theories.
Please leave your comments below and elsewhere.