It's not a matter of supposing that certain things may be happening, or even that they probably are. It's a matter of believing with certainty that they are, without concrete evidence and sometimes even when there's evidence to the contrary.

It's a pernicious bug in certain kinds of psychology that makes it quite hard for someone to tell the difference between nightmarish fantasy and reality. I don't want it.

> It's a pernicious bug in certain kinds of psychology that makes it quite hard for someone to tell the difference between nightmarish fantasy and reality. I don't want it.

When reality has repeatedly put nightmarish fantasy to shame - mostly for lack of imagination on fantasy's part - it's not unreasonable to question the line between optimism-laced skepticism and naivety.

People used to have dreams they aspired to. Now we have nightmares we want to see happen. I don't want it either, but apparently society at large does.

Well said. Of interest to me is why these beliefs? Without evidence, one is capable of believing anything to be true. So why believe conspiracy at all? What psychological and/or aesthetic need are these specific beliefs satisfying?

Because there is already endless concrete evidence that the elites and establishment are out to fleece the common person, and when someone has their bubble burst on this fact, they start looking everywhere for where they might be screwed.

One has to look back some time:

original: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=53510#relPage...

text format: http://www.jfklancer.com/CIA.html

it's also the whole idea of attack models: you don't wait for evidence to construct an attack model