Towards a Rational Conspiracy Theory

A rather circumscribed microcosmic example one can examine is the case of Abigail Shrier, who wrote the book Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.  While it is ironic that Shrier as a regular contributing journalist to the Wall Street Journal and other Mainstream venues, comes out of the Mainstream milieu (for those who have been tuning in, the Mainstream is dominated and steered by the Left), it is ironic also that the various forms of Leftist cancel culture assaults on her & her book have likely helped her book sales and her fame to spread her message, rather than hurt her as they intended

Of course, a Rational Conspiracy Theory wouldn't make sense if you summarily dismiss the possibility of conspiracies in general (or at all). At any rate, Rational Conspiracy Theory proceeds on the assumption that there is a conspiracy, but hasn't yet palpated its contours reasonably.

So, assuming there's a Leftist/Communist conspiracy afoot, it's reasonable to assume the cancel culture phenomenon would be a major weapon in their arsenal, and Abigail Shrier, being an important figure challenging a major Leftist trope, would logically be a figure the conspirators would want to cancel.

The fact then that Abigail Shrier has been helped rather than hurt by the cancel culture attempts against her work means either that the conspirators are inept, or that there is no conspiracy there -- or it means that there are limitations on the ability of the conspirators to succeed in their agenda.   

What are these limitations?  Why do they exist?  And how do the conspirators interact with the non-conspiratorial parts of the sociopolitical ocean in which conspirators and non-conspirators alike swim?  These are fundamental questions a Rational Conspiracy Theory explores.

As usual, important questions raise further questions, such as:  Are the non-conspiratorial elements of the one common world in which we all live -- conspirators and non-conspirators alike -- more numerous and more powerful than the conspiratorial elements?  Or are they roughly equal in number and power?  Or are the conspiratorial elements dominant? (This last option seems to be one hallmark of the irrational conspiracy theory.)

More to come...