"Conspiracy Theory" is, in most contexts, a Thought-Terminating Cliché.

Pro Case:C1: Conspiracies can, and sometimes do, happen. My initial premise here is that, although modern society certainly has become more publicized, there is still nothing that necessarily makes the existence of a conspiracy logically impossible. In other words, there is nothing necessarily preventing any formal or informal group of self-interested individuals or parties from coming to an agreement to do something unlawful or harmful outside of the public's eye (thus making it a secret.) Therefore, a truly rational person would at least honestly consider and weigh all of the available evidence in an attempt to analyze the situation and draw a rational conclusion about any initial claims of a conspiracy (i.e. "account for the situation with an idea." see the definition of "theory.") This, however, does not generally happen. The reason, I argue, is because the very phrase "conspiracy theory" has devolved into a thought-terminating cliché.Furthermore, there have been confirmed instances of actual conspiracies, both historically and recently. For instance:Exhibit 1: "The Business Plot." [1][2]In November, 1934, Marine Corps General Smedley Butler, a man of incredible honesty, credibility, and reliability alleged to the "McCormack-Dickstein Committee" that a group of Wall St. businessmen approached him with the request to head an army of 500,000 volunteer soldiers, backed by 3 million dollars, to overthrow Predident F.D.R. in a 1933 attempt to establish a Fascist dictatorship that would naturally benefit these businessmen. He, Butler, would have no part in it, and testified against these conspirators. The committee's final report, according to the New York Times, "purported to report that a two-month investigation had convinced it that General Butler's story of a fascist march on Washington was alarmingly true" and "It also alleged that definite proof had been found that the much publicized Fascist march on Washington, which was to have been led by Major. Gen. Smedley D. Butler, retired, according to testimony at a hearing, was actually contemplated." Most notably to my case however, was that it was called everything from a "gigantic hoax" and "cocktail putsch," to "perfect moonshine." None of which, obviously, were rational arguments against it, but merely TTC precursors of our more modern "conspiracy theory," which is surely what it would be, and is, called today. No one was persecuted.Exhibits 2-5: Since around that time until now, there have been several other confirmed conspiracies that actually took place. I'll simply list some of them here: The American Eugenics Movement (which was actually a large inspiration to the Nazis), The Tuskegee Experiment, Project Mk Ultra, and the Watergate Scandal (which seems to be the word we call a "conspiracy" once it becomes undeniable to the public.)[3][4][5][6]This small selection of the existing evidence gives plenty of weight to my own argument that there is no rational reason to think that conspiracies, in general, can't happen. Because as we have just examined, in fact they have.C2: Confirmation Bias and the need to quell Cognitive Dissonance. [7][8]Confirmation Bias is the psychological tendency of human beings to selectively gather evidence that supports beliefs that they already have or conclusions that they prejudicially favor. The effect is stronger for emotionally-charged issues and deeply-entrenched beliefs. Therein lies the problem. We often find ourselves in emotional situations that don't turn out the way we wished or believed they would turn out. This causes cognitive dissonance, because our preconceived expectations of how events would turn out are real to us, and the experience of them turning out negatively clashes with our positive expectations. Often, a "wise" friend or family member will explain away this disparity with an aptly-fitted piece of folk-wisdom. Many times, though not always, this folk wisdom only serves as a TTC that doesn't actually explain much, but does serve to quiet our cognitive dissonance. They make us feel that the situation has been accounted for, even if hasn't actually been put through a rational analysis, but they are usually self-satisfying enough to stop us from thinking too much about it anymore.My contention is that the phrase "conspiracy theory" is the most potent contemporary TTC. The reason for this is that most conspiracies we are presented any evidence to support are usually deeply involved in the public institutions and establishments that we identify with. This becomes especially problematic when the evidence comes out after we have backed actions, policies, or legislations that we thoroughly believed in. If the evidence suggests that the cause wasn't as legitimate as we might've hoped, then we experience extreme cognitive dissonance. Increasingly as time has gone on, and as the world has become more connected, we use this phrase "conspiracy theory" as an emotional and psychological safeguard of our own confirmation bias. One will note in their own experience that the moment something is termed such, one of two situations plays itself out. Either you are biased to confirm the established order of things, or you are biased to rebel against that order. If the first case, then the term conspiracy theory applied to new evidence immediately denies the credibility of the evidence and further confirms your bias that everything is as it should be. If the second case, then the term immediately elicits a reponse to independently search for information that confirms the futility and malice of that order. In either case, cognitive dissonance is quelled and no objective thought is considered.C3: This polarization of biases exists today.While I personally do tend to think that there is corruption and misguided motive behind much institutional policy today, I don't subscribe to the more sensational conspiracies of Satanist or illuminati stature. With that being said, this polar divide between superficial, ostensible ideals and out-of-touch, mystical conspiracies harms rational thought and can clearly be observed in many of today's largest issues. For instance, Tony Blair has called any allegations that his government's involvement with the Iraq war that had anything to do with anything other than finding WMDs (e.g. oil) "conspiracy theories" from the very beginning, all the way to the near-present, although they found no evidence of such weapons, and apparently never had much. Also, there is evidence that the C.I.A. had involvement in the training and supplying of Bin Laden's organizations in the past, during the Soviet-Afghan war. And as such there is some reason to believe that they therefore bear some responsibility for 9/11, along with "blowback" from U.S. foreign policy in general. [9][10][11][12]In conclusion, the low tolerance for cognitive dissonance in most of the human population, along with the polarization of emotionally-charged public issues through the confirmation bias, ultimately causes the term "conspiracy theory" to function as a TTC for both sides of any issue, in order that they may quell their own cognitive dissonance and avoid any truly rational thought or creative insight on such matters.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://en.wikipedia.org... [5] http://en.wikipedia.org...[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...[7] http://en.wikipedia.org...[8] http://en.wikipedia.org...[9] http://www.guardian.co.uk...[10]ttp://www.dailymail.co.uk...[11] http://www.guardian.co.uk...[12]http://www.thenation.com...#