Good idiots, bad idiots

The other day, I was observing how simple it is to obtain gunpowder cheaply. Evidently, I overestimated the intelligence of our alleged perps. We are informed that they spent nearly $200 (or $400...whatever) to buy two mortar-type fireworks in order to obtain an inadequate (or barely adequate...whatever) supply of gunpowder at a premium price. Supposing this to be in fact their only source of the stuff (a point being contested as I write) I suppose we are lucky that they weren't smart enough to buy bulk black powder online or in person at under $20 a pound, considering the damage they were able to achieve with whatever they had.

Fortunately the backbone of terrorism seems to be disaffected young men who are also dumb as rocks, at least when it comes to practical explosives. All of this probably makes them good idiots.

The backbone of their diametrical opposites is also comprised of the disaffected, mostly but not exclusively male and not necessarily young, Americans. The chief points they have in common, besides the default level of stupidity, are  a sense of victimhood that makes self-pity look courageous and a level of gullibility that would gladden the heart of a carnival barker. Most of the Americans of this stamp fortunately carry out their jihads in the empty space between their ears.

I was also reflecting on how inappropriate the words "theory" and "theorist" are when paired with "conspiracy." At last, I have a better combination. Let's call them "conspiracy toddlers." Their behaviour is right out of the terrible twos. Regardless of the circumstances, regardless of the evidence, their response is an emphatic "NO!" Like toddlers, they feel no obligation to support their position with reason. What's more, they have the same motivation: attention-getting. Right now, anyone so inclined can have their pick of Marathon bombing conspiracy baby-talk. It's all plausible if Oz's Scarecrow has more brains than the audience, especially because it floats free of the need to provide evidence.

My freshman political science professor taught us to eschew the notion of a political spectrum. He said the term conjures up a false notion of a linear progression, with Hitler on one end and Mao Zedong on the other. He favoured the idea of a circular progression. He showed us how, in this model, the extremes of either camp overlapped and mingled, giving us Adolph Zedong and Mao Hitler, as it were. Now we have Jihadis and right-wing conspiracy toddlers, and after a short time, they all sound the same.