“Conspiracy Theorists” Not Welcome on OWS Site
November 22, 2011 4 Comments
The OWS site has changed its moderation policies so that folks who listen to Alex Jones, David Icke, Lyndon Larouche, and others, as well as political campaign supporters – particularly Ron Paul 2012 supporters. Anyone who posts anything about anything these guys say is subject to a global network ban now. Seriously?
I will admit that I watch Alex Jones – not religiously, but I do enjoy him. Not everything he says is correct, but he does put out good information, and he talks about things that the MSM won’t touch, and I appreciate that. David Icke is kind of a nutter, frankly, but people have the right to listen to him, if they so desire. I don’t know all that much about Larouche, although I’ve seen a few videos of his. Honestly, I don’t really remember what he’s about. But I do know that some of the so-called “conspiracies,” such as the Federal Reserve destroying the currency, aren’t really conspiracies, but they are true, from a financial standpoint. Whether or not it’s a conspiracy, well, that’s another story. The “conspiracy” that there is no real law mandating a personal income tax? Not a conspiracy – it’s true.
Where am I going with this? It seems silly to place a ban on information coming from certain sources. I understand that the organization – and apparently there is some form of organization at the top, even if the street protestors seem helter-skelter – has the right to do whatever it wants with its own website, but in my opinion, they aren’t doing their supporters any favors by excluding certain topics from discussion. There should be a discussion of the Fed and the role that government plays in the creation of this debt problem. Injection of different ideas can be a healthy thing.
Also to be considered is that actions like this aren’t going to garner the movement any brownie points with “the other side” – the disaffected conservative element. And there is a disaffected “conservative” element which includes Republicans, libertarians, and constitutionalists. It seems foolhardy to actively attempt to splinter away from these people. It seems foolish to ban certain ideas just because they’re “conservative.” Not all conservative ideas are inherently “bad,” just as not all liberal ideas are inherently good. Both sides have good points about some things.
Whatever the case, I think OWS is going to end up alienating people who would potentially like to take part. They have the right to shut the door on these people, but it isn’t going to help the cause, nationally. Also, if I’m being honest – or perhaps sounding like a conspiracy theorist – it seems like they’re trying to separate themselves from any conservative element, which is a quick way, frankly, to ensure that the movement never makes it past a certain stage of development. If a large portion of the country views them as dirty, socialist hippies with no tolerance for any difference of opinion, they’ve already slit their own throats. Either the movement has already been co-opted, or they’re just foolish.
If you want to take a look at OWS moderating policies, click here.
About The Lady Libertarian
The Lady Libertarian 
I had to check that out and I agree, I don’t think blocking out certain opinions will help the discussion any. I actually like to read about conspiracy theories. I think it’s just a quick way to discredit someone’s argument to label it a “conspiracy theory”, and I think that’s a mistake. But I see it on plenty of forums all the time. The moderators only like to keep the opinions that agree with them.
Yeah. I mean, I agree that there are some conspiracy theories that are a bit much (see David Icke’s conspiracy theory about reptilians), but I don’t think we should discount anything outright just because it doesn’t fit the norm, per se. I mean, people used to think anyone against the Fed was a conspiracy theorist, but hey, you can’t argue with facts, and the facts are out there, for anyone who wants to look. I think of it this way: just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you.
There are alot of crazies out there, aka- conspiracy theorists. I’m not talking about people who logically cross-examine certain issues, I’m talking about the nuts. The way out there who believe in aliens (both Heaven’s Gate believers and the new nuts, Scientologists) and the little bit out there, like those who believe 9/11 was a building being blown up and the planes were just scenery, or whatever. But after looking at some of these answers, it struck me; the rants from the nuts and those of the political extremists some people consider any more sane aren’t too far apart. On one side, we have nuts saying “Aliens are coming! And if we’re believers, we can talk to animals and fly with them in the spaceship!” and the nuts saying “Liberals are trying to sell our country to the terrorists! They want us weak for takeover, we must deport them all!”, or is there even one? And don’t get me wrong, it isn’t like the left doesn’t do it either (their often the one’s with the weird 9/11 theories)
I agree, there are wing nuts on both sides. As I said, I’ve probably heard just about every conspiracy theory there is, although a new one will crop up for me to enjoy every now and then. A really interesting one that was just called to my attention is cloud-seeding. Again, something I saw on Alex Jones and gave it little more than passing thought, but a friend of mine who is over in the Middle East teaching informed me that they met a guy in the UAE who does it for a living. So there you are.
The thing about conspiracy theorists is that they believe things are being done in secret. I somewhat disagree in that I believe things that threaten our liberty are being done right out in the open. Yes, the media does a shoddy job of reporting on it, but at the end of the day, a lot of the information can be found, if only people are willing to look. Still, it seems hard to discount all conspiracy theories completely, since it seems like most things done in our government today are rarely, if ever, done for the benefit of the people.