One of the best defenses of conspiracy theories I have read in recent years was euro-skeptic John Laughland's (UK) "The Spectator" article "I believe in conspiracy theories."
Laughland makes the point that 'establishment' "anti-conspiracy theorists" are not the epistemological skeptics they like to pretend they are. In effect we have a range of official regime endorsed conspiracy theories (e.g. Iraq/Iran has WMDs, 9-11 was engineered by a man in a cave) and 'respectable opinion' is supposed to take these claims based off the most limited and "trust me" evidence. It is "official conspiracy theories" versus the unofficials.
How about "Mornings with Murray"? It's cleaner.
ReplyDeleteI would like to "Breakfast with Murray". It's a nourishing way to start one's day.
ReplyDeleteGreat idea!
ReplyDeleteWhat a guy. We really need him today.
One of the best defenses of conspiracy theories I have read in recent years was euro-skeptic John Laughland's (UK) "The Spectator" article "I believe in conspiracy theories."
ReplyDeleteLaughland makes the point that 'establishment' "anti-conspiracy theorists" are not the epistemological skeptics they like to pretend they are. In effect we have a range of official regime endorsed conspiracy theories (e.g. Iraq/Iran has WMDs, 9-11 was engineered by a man in a cave) and 'respectable opinion' is supposed to take these claims based off the most limited and "trust me" evidence. It is "official conspiracy theories" versus the unofficials.