We should re-iterate the essential features that lead people to label something a conspiracy, vs. a normal group activity or conventionally advanced political agenda :
- An ultimate goal.
- A series of actions that more or less logically should achieve the goal.
- A significant amount of planning and coordination, in addition to the actions, to achieve the goal.
- Either the ultimate goal, or the planning and coordination, are hidden/covered up/done in secret.
It only is the added secrecy that distinguishes it. Now, in the 21st century, enough human history has occurred, with enough tragedies and plotting (successful and unsuccessful), that practically speaking, the vast majority of plots can be anticipated. Even a conspiracy to kill a ruler, has had tens of thousands of precedents, so even without any specific evidence, one can consider that someone is plotting against the ruler. Moreover, given this history as a guide/reference, a series of actions that have led to a successful plot in the past, clearly can be marked out as the initial stages of a conspiracy, without any specific knowledge of the plotters and their scheming. (cf. paranoia is obsolete) In that regard, the concept of a “conspiracy theory” as such, is a problematic way of thinking about the situation, as its essential characteristics largely have been compromised by the communal gain of knowledge.
Hence, when we talk about “conspiracy theory”, we also must consider the other way that it’s used: as a pejorative against people who claim that a conspiracy exists. In this context, they use “conspiracy theory” as a shorthand for “there isn’t actually a conspiracy or any general movement towards the goal of that conspiracy”. Hence we first should review how you would define a specific conspiracy:
- You have to name the goal/outcome.
- You have to name either a documented series of planned actions, or a series of actual actions combined with planned actions, that more or less logically lead to the goal.
- You have to identify some people who are planning and coordinating the actions.
- You have to name which (or both) of the ultimate goal, or the planning and coordination, are done in secret.
Naming a goal/outcome is trivial.
You easily can name a series of actions based on the history of plots, and history in general.
Naming people is trivial; for example, any person can write a plan to kill someone, even if they don’t currently have the means.
Identifying planning and coordination as being done in secret, in a broad sense, also is trivial (though this is not obvious as I will explain). Consider the historical conspiracy theories: the planning is being done by conversations, secret notes passed amongst each other, non-language signaling like lighting torches or choosing a particular troop movement; in short, by a wide variety of observed and unobserved means. To ignore the observed means (although meaningful) to simplify the explanation: if plotting can be just a bunch of people talking, then Davos, Jackson Hole, high society parties, mansion visits, business meetings, and all manner of social interaction that isn’t recorded/broadcast – all can be labeled as consistent with conspiracy, because they are secret actions that could be coordination.
Hence to define a conspiracy theory almost is trivial; but the debate is not about all definable conspiracies. Rather, it is about which conspiracies exist. To argue in a simpler way, instead of showing how to prove a conspiracy exists, I will enumerate how to disprove its existence:
- The goal, abstractly, cannot be proven or disproven.
- There are no planned actions and no actual actions that support the named goal, in a way that somehow would progress to the achievement of the goal. For example, someone could be planning to win an election, but without a plan to resort to violence in the event of loss, this could not be a conspiracy to kill the ruler. Similarly, if people are selling their guns and body armor, then moving away and starting a new life somewhere else, the actions are not more or less logically leading to the outcome.
- The people who are supposed to be carrying out the actions, aren’t carrying out the actions. That is, the actions could be happening, but the people named aren’t the ones doing it.
- The people who are supposed to be planning the conspiracy, don’t have any written plans or other documentation. Moreover, they are not talking with each other and could not be coordinating that way.
- The planning and coordination is not being done in secret, so it merely is a group action.
What then, does it mean to “make a conspiracy theory impossible to dismiss”? (The conspiracy itself, exists whether or not it is identified as a theory, and therefore the evaluation criteria apply regardless of the existence of that theory.) The reverse/refutation of the “conspiracy theory” allegation is that there is general movement/proceedings towards the goal of the named conspiracy, and that none of these five refutation criteria apply. (You also could prove that there really is a conspiracy, but it’s not necessary since all you need is general movement – and practically speaking, you are not going to be able to distinguish the two anyway.)
Consider a simple case: a ruler issues a decree without any warning. One simply can identify the individuals that were communicating with the ruler, and their associates, as members of the conspiracy. That’s because the mere arbitrariness of the action makes its planning effectively secret, and the ruler clearly took an action that achieves the goal. In other words, you can build a conspiracy theory around this situation, simply by naming additional individuals who somehow caused the ruler to issue the decree.
We should recognize that arbitrary action – in this case, particularly we care about the “without grounded/reasonable explanation” aspect – as the crucial element that enables the naming of essentially arbitrary co-conspirators. If the ruler had instead promulgated a set of basic governing principles, and debate had followed, resulting in a presentation, and then the ruler had accepted on that basis, affirming the reasoning behind the policy selection, then we neither could consider the action to have been taken in secret, nor could we arbitrarily name individuals in conspiracy, as the actual people touching the documents and debating are well known. (Tangentially, the rules-based order also means that the implicit element of deviation from the norm/status quo in conspiracy, also does not exist.)
“Without grounded/reasonable explanation” also can occur in an environment of deception and illogical thinking. If the ruler said “I want to reduce inflation” then raised taxes to increase government spending on goods, then while an explanation was offered, it did not accord to the stated policy objectives and hence essentially was arbitrary/without reference to said policy objectives. Similarly, if the ruler prints currency, and say “this policy will reduce inflation”, the ruler clearly is not acting in accordance with the causal relationship and hence that action is arbitrary with respect to that relationship – that is, that action is arbitrary with respect to reality.
So as a practical example, we now come to the Plandemic, and show how, despite the weight of the evidence/situation most strongly implicating the Beijing and Wuhan mafias as the cause of COVID-19, the collective actions of the Biden administration made it impossible to dismiss this conspiracy theory:
- The national emergency was not lifted after the wide availability of vaccines (note: it could have been re-instituted if situations worsened and hospitals filled), nor when hospital loads returned to manageable levels.
- The eviction moratorium was extended for roughly a year after the availability of vaccines, and despite the lack of evidence that it significantly reduced spread.
- The states could not drop individuals from their Medicaid programs (very long and complicated story short, this is a step towards socialized/single-payer national health care system).
- Student loan forbearance and forgiveness was justified on the basis of the emergency and its consequences (despite the fact that the economy clearly recovered a year later, and a labor shortage ensued).
- No significant actions against Beijing East Asia to punish them for their coverup, or to isolate the West from their disease-spreading inclinations, have been taken. That is consistent with a planned spread/acceptance of the situation, and is inconsistent with treatment as a breach of the international order (as is seen in e.g. Ukraine responses).
- The justification of “disinformation” was used by the Biden administration (and certain individuals e.g. in the Trump administration, this was not one group of people) to order Big Tech companies and others to censor dissidents – and as usual, sometimes those dissidents were telling the truth. Such censorship typically is associated with removing obstacles towards the implementation of specific policy objectives, and in general to gain political advantage/bolster the power of the ruling class.
Hence, the goal of state control under the Democratic Party/deep-state regime, clearly was advanced by the policy actions, and all the individuals (e.g. Fauci) associated with the conspiracy theory, were well known. Nor were these isolated actions, but they occurred systematically, repeatedly, and over a long period of time, reinforcing the fundamentally organized nature associated with the conspiracy theory. But the two fundamental points that make the conspiracy theory aspects I want to emphasize with regards to the conspiracy theory, are that:
- All these actions essentially were arbitrary. Many were unnecessary/pointless in the knowledge at the time, and several of them directly contradict the policy objective of reducing harms of COVID-19 and other such infectious diseases.
- Instead of the ruling class acknowledging the errors and thereby avoiding e.g. the student loan debt cancellation, they continue to assert the need for the emergency in blatant disregard of the facts, and deny their role in censorship. By these actions, you don’t even have to name arbitrary individuals and cite unspecified coordination you didn’t see: you see that every one of the individuals in charge of these policies is sticking together, which allows you to name them as Plandemic conspirators. Moreover, as they continue to deny and cover up, this satisfies the requirement for some planning and coordination to have some element of secrecy.
Those in power chose to take arbitrary actions, and then to minimize their mistakes and cover up their involvement. Hence, even as I, Leif Powers, blame the Beijing and Wuhan mafia for the situation, I must acknowledge the Plandemic conspiracy as a likely scenario (and on similar grounds/with similar logic as that with which I judge Beijing and Wuhan mafias as guilty). Moreover, I must accept that those who continue to deny that as a possibility, practically speaking, are part of the conspiracy.
Now let’s consider a different scenario, more diffuse and more intellectually interesting: the current North American version of the Great Replacement, whereby the whites/Christians (insiders) will be replaced with the colored/non-Christians (outsiders). The claim is that this is a “conspiracy theory”, it’s not being planned (broadly speaking).
We should define the conspiracy theory:
- The goal is to replace enough white people/Christians to get the coloreds/non-Christians political power, which they can use to impose their own racial, religious, or cultural policies on the previously dominant class (**ignoring that this is not an accurate description of the dominant class).
- The actions are to increase outsider immigration, reduce insider birthrates, and as a secondary objectives, to use political correctness and other forms of censorship and social stigma to undermine and replace insider culture.
- The individuals involved are the left parties (e.g. in the 48 states, Democrats) and their constellation of immigrant support groups, multiculturalists, and aesthetic totalitarians.
- The major element of secrecy is not the intermediate policies or the tactical discussion; it is the denial that these policies will have the ultimate effect as stated in the goal.
and then we should reflect on some of the facts that would refute attempts at disproof:
- Through a series of actions such as uncontrolled immigration (e.g. the 48-states/Mexico border, Syrian exodus), the improvement of abortion and contraception, the sex education propaganda implemented by the state, and the pro-natalist, anti-family laws in the 48 states, the insider population has gone below birthrate and the balance between insiders and outsiders greatly has shifted in favor of the outsiders.
- The individuals involved in uncontrolled immigration (e.g. Democratic presidents in the 48 states), continue their politicians’ denials and refusal to account for the consequences of their actions, which makes their policy essentially arbitrary and therefore marking them as conspirators. Nor are immigration policy changes made by legislation, but they are implemented on the whim of the executive, hence implying policy decisions by groups of conspirators.
- The pendulum of affirmative action to correct definite harms from the past, has turned into a new de jure anti-insider bias that has been implemented in secondary education/colleges, the workplace, government contracting, and the legal code e.g. hate crimes. All of these are pro-outsider/anti-insider actions. Those implementing these policies either deny they exist, or they assert that the insiders deserve it/are inferior to the outsiders. (This adds to the minor tactical element of secrecy.)
Most importantly, that people use the term “conspiracy theory” as a pejorative against the Great Replacement idea, and issue a blanket denial that it will happen or that it is a possibility. Remember that the term itself often is used in a way that is denying the existence of the theory. That usage by itself should not be used to stifle the discussion – but at the same time, the individuals who discuss Great Replacement and want to say, “oh this and that does not support the theory”, or even “it’s going to stop for reasons X, Y, and Z” should acknowledge that this movement is underway and on its current trajectory, likely will have the consequences laid out in the theory. To deny this, is to add back that element of arbitrary behavior, secrecy, and deception, that makes it a valid conspiracy theory, vs. being individuals advocating for their desired policies.