[api]

I’m not saying there aren’t attempts to control society. It’s what governments, think tanks, ad agencies, activist groups of all stripes, etc do for a living. There’s just tons of them and they’re at each others throats half the time.

There are groups of people who think they run the world. They’re delusional. There’s people who aspire to run the world who are also delusional. They can do a lot of damage sometimes before they fail.

[yubblegum]

I think you are overmodulating the conclusions bit here. It is more than just "attempts".

Possibly the difference in our views here have to do with what degree of (collective mind) control is of sufficient utility to various interested parties. Does one need to "run" the world or "100% control everything". I doubt it. I am thinking of the analogy of shifting the course of rivers here, where the (collective) river ends up behaving in the expected manner, and (individual) water molecules are (relatively) free to do wheelies or flow the other way or whatever remains possible within the overall boundaries of the river and its 'set course'.

[potato3732842]

This. People have a hard time wrestling with the fractional nature of it.

You don't need to convince everyone that Iraq has WMDs or that Stanley travel mugs are hot shit, just enough people to get done what you're trying to get done.

[lo_zamoyski]

The distinction (as others make) is between conspiracies and conspiracy theories. Of course conspiracies exist. Conspiracy theories, however, are flaky, unsubstantiated substitutes for genuine explanation that hinge on improbable or impossible conditions and powers to hold [0], often in the face of contradictory and much more reasonable alternatives.

[0] https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2021/01/narrative-thinking-...