I'm on a bit of a financial corruption kick right now. I mentioned conspiracy theory in one of my earlier posts...well I just finished watching Collapse and it is undoubtedly in the conspiracy theory genre. But the thing about conspiracy theories is that they vary in their amount of plausibility. Some conspiracy theories are just crazy far fetched stuff that sounds like something someone cooked up while taking psychotropic drugs (stuff like alien abduction cover ups, etc.). Then there are those conspiracy theories that take real verifiable facts and give them a plausible (though not widely accepted) interpretation. Collapse falls into the later category. Michael Ruppert gives plausible, rational arguments for why he believes that modern industrialized societies are facing an impeding collapse.
For me, the least convincing aspects of his story are the bits about corruption in the CIA. I don't doubt that it happens, but some of his accusations seemed implausible. But to be fair, most of these comments were made in passing and he didn't share his reasoning behind them (since it's not what the film is about), so perhaps I would find it more plausible if I knew what his evidence was.
For his main point (the part about impending collapse) he makes a very convincing case. I think what he gives is a worse case scenario - but a plausible one. What I find most compelling is his depiction of a post-peak oil scenario. There are two undeniable facts he cites in the film: 1. modern industrial society is completely dependent on oil consumption; 2. oil is a finite resource. He takes these two facts and rams them down your throat with a shoe horn, forcing you to confront the inevitable conclusion. Click the link below to watch the film.