A friend of mine read an article or heard a podcast and is convinced that JFK was shot by more than one gunman.
I don’t really want to engage, but he has brought it up twice recently.
I’m looking for a succinct, substantive response - perhaps with a cite - that would shut him down.
I don’t expect to convince him otherwise; my goal is to not hear about it again.
mmm
If conspiracy theories could be succinctly shut down, they wouldn’t gain traction as conspiracy theories. The only way to win is not to play.
Perhaps you can go for subtlety:
Bob, I like you as a person, but you’re acting like a fucking moron and it’s real hard for me to stay your friend until you quit talking about conspiracy nonsense like that and never bring it up again.
I’m kidding somewhat. My punchline, as suggested by @Johnny_Bravo above, is that it is already impossible to change his mind. He wants his head full of conspiracy theories. The only thing you can hope to do is have him stop talking to you about them.
Sorta like religion and politics ought not be discussed in a group, the same applies to CTs. He’ll either accept that message or not. That’s his decision. Then you can either abandon him or not. That’s your decision. IMO the best way to get him to make the decision you prefer is to explain what the consequences of his decision will be in short simple sentences with short simple words.
I like this approach.
Point and laugh.
How about, “Honestly, Bob, I don’t care who was involved with killing the president 60 years ago.”
If he’s a friend, can’t you just say “look, I don’t want to talk about this. Please drop it”. I have a good friend with whom I had a strong political difference of opinion years ago. We eventually decided by mutual agreement to avoid talk of politics in general, although I think he’s come around more to my political point of view since then.
Failing that, maybe try to out-crazy him so he wants to drop the subject. “Yes, there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll, and get this-- it was Frank Sinatra! He was still pissed off that Kennedy decided not to stay at his place in California in 1962!”
John F. Kennedy!”
“Who’s JFK?”
Pretend you have no idea who JFK was and that he was assassinated. He’ll go crazy with frustration, give up and leave.
Oh yeah, that’s some good out-crazying: future JFK, in an alternate timeline in which he wasn’t assassinated, had screwed up international relations so badly that he realized the only way he could fix it was to travel through a wormhole to the past and kill his younger self. As soon as his younger self died, older JFK disappeared from existence, which is why he was never found on the grassy knoll.
You can also go with, “Dude, it’s been 60 years. Who cares?”
I wouldn’t be that gentle about it. After telling him outright that he’s a fucking idiot and waste of DNA, and deserved what’s going to happen to him, I’d pretend my cell phone rang, pretend to answer, say “Yes, he’s here right now”, look quickly over my shoulder then run away as fast as my old wobbly legs would allow.
This, followed by changing the subject or leaving.
If this plan just isn’t feasible, try asking what evidence would prove them wrong. If their conspiracy theory isn’t falsifiable at all, give up.
Nah, I say let him prattle on, so long as you make sure he knows that you consider the subject neither interesting, nor important, nor relevant to today’s world. People like that want you to either to agree with them, argue with them or reject them - it validates their beliefs. What they can’t handle is a shrug.
Besides, the truth of the matter is, the Kennedy assassination is, in fact, neither interesting, nor important, nor relevant to today’s world.
If you don’t want to talk about it, and you want to retain his friendship, just set a boundary. “I know this topic is important to you, but it isn’t to me. I don’t want to talk about it again.” Then – important! – DON’T TALK ABOUT IT.
If he protests, or brings it up any other time, just say, “I’m not talking about this.” Then change the subject. Repeat as necessary. That is all that is needed. Everything else is rude, counterproductive, or a combination of those.
Yup. I have a friend with crazy vaccine conspiracy theories, and that’s awkward. I mostly change the subject or leave when she gets going. But i can’t imagine really caring about how it why Kennedy was assassinated today.
No cites will ever convince a committed conspiracy theorist. Firm discouragement and a change of subject are your best bet.
“That’s crazy shit and I don’t want to hear about it anymore. How about dem Steelers?”
With some variation, that was the plotline of an episode of the great British space-sitcom “Red Dwarf.” Season 7, Episode 1, “Tikka to Ride.”
I had to cut out several people from my life because they were obsessed with converting me over to their side of various conspiracy theories (Jewish shadow world government, 9/11 truther, anti-vaccination, Obama birther/Muslim, you name it). I might send a Christmas/New Year message, but otherwise no contact.
They.would.not.drop.it.
A couple have somehow recovered. One is no longer a 9/11 Truther. Another has seemingly given up their quixotic fight against the homosexual agenda and is now openly supporting a trans nephew against his parents who’d rather have him dead than male.
On the other hand, I maintain functioning relationships with many others whose views are quite odious because we talk about our kids, the horror show that is Pakistan cricket, careers in middle age, cooking, etc.