Conspiracy Theory Debate

[The Legendary Shark]

https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/

First result when I Googled, "Who financed Russia in WWII?"

[Funt Solo]

Shark - I offered some fictional takes on the JFK myth because I enjoyed them. But they're presented as fiction and labeled as such. You're offering a fiction that labels itself as fact (from a Holocaust denial site). No thank-you, very much. It's not you - it's what you're offering.

[Funt Solo]

...maybe I'm being successfully trolled, in which case shame on me.

Well, he keeps asking for evidence after being provided with evidence, so either troll or ... something less kind.

[TordelBack]

And they never were considered as part of Allied faction. At least I never saw it anywhere.

Not even Potsdam?

[The Legendary Shark]

I have been listening to Corbett for many years and have never heard him deny the Holocaust or promote it as a good or necessary thing. He criticises some aspects of Israel's government, as he criticises some aspects of all governments, but his criticisms are based on neither race or religion.

I'm not saying that everything he says is correct or all his opinions are valid - something he often says himself - but I find him in no way bigoted, racist, or fascist. Your conception of him is of a person I do not recognise.

At the end of the day, it's up to you. Listen to it, don't listen to it. It's no skin off my fin. But, please, if you don't want to then I don't care, honestly, I ask only that you don't then try to justify your disinterest by throwing second-hand accusations around in the hope something will stick. You have a better mind than that.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

... you absolutely do have to read Mein Kampf, and the rest of his personal papers, if you want to honestly and accurately argue against Hitler's world-view, otherwise you're just arguing against other people's interpretations of Hitler's world-view.

I think I get your point, and from a purely academic stance you're broadly right, although if you want to be purely pedantic academic, Mein Kampf would only really give you an insight into 20-something jailbird emo Hitler's worldview. The worldview of Fuhrer and Trump-level-arsebiscuit Hitler would probably be a bit different, because people can be wildly inconsistent. You did mention you would have to read all other personal papers and correspondence, but you would have to have a serious academic interest to start into that. Honestly I don't have the time, a serious enough interest or the even adequate intellectual tools to get into all that, but others do, so I would defer to them. I might not be qualified to give a full dissertation arguing the minutiae of Hitler's views, but I don't think history has been too unkind to him and I think I can honestly and accurately say Hitler's worldview was that of a bigoted, narcissistic, antisemitic wee dickhead. I think it's not unfair to say you can only honestly and accurately assess someone's world view by having an open and frank face-to-face conversation. Unfortunately we cannot do this with Hitler because he was murdered by *checks notes* Huh, Hitler killed Hitler, maybe he wasnae so bad.

[Funt Solo]

And they never were considered as part of Allied faction. At least I never saw it anywhere.

Not even Potsdam?

C'mon, Tordelback - that's clearly been doctored!

[Modern Panther]

I'm happy to say that Hitler was a bad 'un, even though I've never read his book.  I'm also happy to believe that the Earth is a globe, despite never having actually checked for myself.

[Funt Solo]

At the end of the day, it's up to you. Listen to it, don't listen to it. It's no skin off my fin. But, please, if you don't want to then I don't care, honestly, I ask only that you don't then try to justify your disinterest by throwing second-hand accusations around in the hope something will stick. You have a better mind than that.

If you can promote something that doesn't have any credible source behind it, then I can denigrate it. Fair? (It took me about five seconds of internet sleuthing to find links to fascist ideology riding on the coattails of your recommended source, which propagates the myth that the world is controlled by a secret cabal. You're allowed to believe it in the same way as I'm allowed to call it out as bullshit.)

Y'see, when I had my appendix out, I didn't stop the surgeon and ask for some medical books so I could study up on the procedure first - because I recognized the surgeon was an expert. Fuck it - even if he was some charlatan, he was the best option I had right then.

I rely on experts so that I don't have to become an expert on everything (because that's impossible, as amazing as I am). And then I rely on consensus, because then one rogue expert can't pull a sneaky and fool me with bullshit.

I disagree quite fundamentally with your approach of listening to lone non-experts who purport to be experts on everything, and the idea that everything I assume to be true must first be closely studied at a microscopic level. So, no - I don't need to always look at 'X'. And I think that's a ridiculous approach to life, or truth-seeking, or whatever it is you're doing.

[milstar]

And they never were considered as part of Allied faction. At least I never saw it anywhere.

Not even Potsdam?

Actually, I had more in mind Yalta conference

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

I don't need to always look at 'X'. And I think that's a ridiculous approach to life, or truth-seeking, or whatever it is you're doing.

I'm going to introduce quantum physics to this discussion, which is basically the intellectual equivalent of flipping the game board, but fuck it, I'm not that well informed on World War II, and this is closer to my wheelhouse.

You cannot draw any definitive conclusions by looking at "x". The act of observing "x" means a bare minimum of one photon has to bounce off it. The energy imparted by that one photon bouncing off "x" might change the fundamental nature of "x". The angle at which that photon bounces off "x" might change it in different ways, to the point where multiple observers, at various angles might simultaneously see different versions of "x". Some might even see "+". You could take things to the extreme and claim that, isomorphically, "x" is just two lines intersecting, so from certain angles the photons bouncing off it might make it look like an "L". To paraphrase Feynman, if any of this makes sense, you're not paying attention.

In this case, you should try and collate as many observers as you can. Observers from multiple angles. Then it's just up to you whether you accept the consensus that there's an "x", or listen to someone who definitely saw an "L".

To be clear, the people claiming "L" in this case are the conspiracy nuts. The evidence they have presented isn't wrong. Their individual observation cannot be denied. It's their failure to take other, contradictive evidence into account, that makes them wrong.

You can go back to proving history happened to Milstar now, my apologies. Quantum is bullshit argument.

[Rara Avis]

Actually, I had more in mind Yalta conference

How about Tehran 1943?

[The Legendary Shark]

(It took me about five seconds of internet sleuthing to find links to fascist ideology riding on the coattails of your recommended source, which propagates the myth that the world is controlled by a secret cabal.

I'd like to see those links.

[JayzusB.Christ]

That Josef 'Keanu Depp' Stalin has really let himself go.

[Tjm86]

And they never were considered as part of Allied faction. At least I never saw it anywhere.

... now I'm convinced this is trolling.