"Why is it that virtually all "reputable" scholars and mass media columnists
and commentators reject the cause and effect or conspiratorial theory of
history? Primarily, most scholars follow the crowd in the academic
world just as most women follow fashions. To buck the tide means social and
professional ostracism. The same is true of the mass media. While professors and
pontificators profess to be tolerant and broadminded, in practice it's strictly
a one way street-with all traffic flowing left. A Maoist can be tolerated by
Liberals of Ivory Towerland or by the Establishment's media pundits, but to be a
conservative, and a conservative who propounds a conspiratorial view, is
absolutely verboten. Better you should be a drunk at a national WCTU
convention!
Secondly, these people have over the years acquired a strong vested emotional
interest in their own errors. Their intellects and egos are totally committed to
the accidental theory. Most people are highly reluctant to admit that they have
been conned or have shown poor judgment. To inspect the evidence of the
existence of a conspiracy guiding our political destiny from behind the scenes
would force many of these people to repudiate a lifetime of accumulated
opinions. It takes a person with strong character indeed to face the facts and
admit he has been wrong even if it was because he was uninformed. Such was the
case with the author of this book. It was only because he set out to prove the
conservative anti-Communists wrong that he happened to end up writing this book.
His initial reaction to the conservative point of view was one of suspicion and
hostility; and it was only after many months of intensive research that he had
to admit that he had been "conned."
Politicians and "intellectuals" are attracted to the concept that events are
propelled by some mysterious tide of history or happen by accident. By this
reasoning they hope to escape the blame when things go wrong.
Most intellectuals, pseudo and otherwise, deal with the conspiratorial theory
of history simply by ignoring it. They never attempt to refute the evidence. It
can't be refuted. If and when the silent treatment doesn't work, these
"objective" scholars and mass media opinion molders resort to personal attacks,
ridicule and satire. The personal attacks tend to divert attention from the
facts which an author or speaker is trying to expose. The idea is to force the
person exposing the conspiracy to stop the exposure and spend his time and
effort defending himself."
from "None dare call it Conspiracy" Gary Allen