Alex Jones (pictured above on the right, speaking with Piers Morgan) may be one of the best known conspiracy theorists. His angry ranting seems to work well for him on his radio (and internet) show but for most folks he must come across as irrational.
Conspiracy theorists don’t help expose the truth, they (often inadvertently) cloud the truth by tainting the facts they present with small insertions of accusations, assumptions, generalizations and inaccurate facts.
The only way wake up the masses from a big lie would be with a mountain of rock solid investigation backed with undeniable facts presented as glossy as the prime time news. This is because the bigger the lie the bigger the case against it must be.
Hitler knew how to tell the biggest lies and wrote about them in Mein Kampf:
“All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true within itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.” (wikipedia)
So when we are presented with big lies, or big truths, there must be a larger opposing force to push it aside. Apparently this as true for ideas as it is for physics.
This also explains why conspiracy theorists make matters worse. A small group of people that are open to alternate ideas and those who don’t buy into the main stream point of view will listen and believe the conspiracy theorist. The masses will think the conspiracy theorist is just a nut and their beliefs in the main stream point of view will end up being hardened.
What to do?
Think for yourself, weigh all the evidence yourself, and decide which truth seems more plausible. Then (more importantly) observe the tide, step back, and avoid being caught up – not to turn your back on the issues but to better choose your next step.
In the case of Sandy Hook, just like 9/11, we see a lot of evidence presented by conspiracy theorists that seems valid that the official story is filled with partial truths. We also see the powers-that-be pushing an agenda. In the case of 9/11 it was war with Iraq, in the case of Sandy Hook it’s gun control.
So the tide this time is a swirling confusion of facts but the main direction of the flow is toward gun control. So no matter what actually happened at Sandy Hook the powers-that-be, or a powerful subset, want to take guns away from Americans. The outcome of this could have wide sweeping impacts such as an increase in crime overall, the reduction of personal freedom, and the increasing of the centralization of power in Washington DC.
So one’s next step should probably account for those net effects. You can also choose to fight the tide which may be a fools errand much as tilting at windmills but if it makes you happy go for it. Otherwise it may be more beneficial to focus on the things you can control and surf toward and eddy to ride out the wave.
Caution, paradigm shift ahead.