A conspiracy theory proven true is no longer a conspiracy theory, it is a boring fact. Conspiracy theorists aren't going out on the streets protesting the gradual erosion of civil liberties. They're calling that a limited hangout and demanding the real juicy shit, even if it doesn't exist.

I can't fathom how you could read the Church Committee report and describe the facts in it as "boring".

The definition of "conspiracy theorist" seems either pejorative or not, depending on who you ask. Why do you prefer to use it as a pejorative?

Abuses of government power are boring facts. “ A conspiracy theory is an explanation for an event or situation that asserts the existence of a conspiracy by powerful and sinister groups, often political in motivation, when other explanations are more probable.”

The government running secret weapons tests, boring facts. The government running secret weapons test on recovered alien technology, conspiracy theory.

> Conspiracy theorists aren't going out on the streets protesting the gradual erosion of civil liberties.

I love a good No true Scotsman mixed with a twist of ad hominem.

In my experience, conspiracy theorists don't have a lot of interest in these. Unprovable conspiracy theories are more interesting because it affirms their sense of paranoia, identity, feeling special, entitlement to the truth.

Conspiracy theorists might go on and on about JFK or 9/11 or Pizzagate, but how often do you hear the conspiracy type obsess about Jan. 6, an actual proven conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States? The "proven" conspiracy theories they do care about, like MKUltra, are generally cast as far more consequential than most people would say they actually are.

> but how often do you hear the conspiracy type obsess about Jan. 6, an actual proven conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States?

Actually, they do. There are a lot of claims online saying it an FBI false flag operation, going so far as to name a specific person as an FBI plant.

That is technically an example, but I think it also proves OP's point. Faced with a clear, public, and well-understood conspiracy, the theorists can't accept the demonstrated facts. For the surface truth to be the actual truth is intensely unsatisfying and disempowering. There must be something more and deeper to it, always.

In many cases, yes. You'll often find the actual conspiracy that turned out to be true only had a tangential relation to (and few if any specific details in common with) what conspiracy theorists were talking about. Although the conspiracy theorists will always take credit for "being right all along."

And invariably, the actual conspiracy gets revealed by parties other than conspiracy theorists themselves, because the conspiracy theorists don't actually have insider knowledge, they're just doing the strings and thumbtacks thing and making guesses.