Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joseph Tracy's avatar

Conspiracy Theory

I have different take on the topic, because of something you noted in the first part of the essay. Many have used the term conspiracy theory and its association with junky paranoid stories like pizzagate to deny that there could be any conspiracies of powerful people or within powerful organizations. This strikes me as incredibly dangerous. So in the interest of reasoned dialectic I will try to make the case that the exploration of a conspiracy theory can definitely be necessary and fruitful in clarifying and acting on important social and antisocial happenings. I will in fact argue that the proper and sane engagement with conspiracy theory can be critical to our very survival. By proper engagement I mean 2 things 1)refuting and exposing false conspiracy theories( for example the state propaganda that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, was connected to 9-11 and was a viable and immediate threat to the US), and 2) considering very seriously more plausible theories and not covering up uncomfortable facts.( The Neo-cons were pimps for US Imperialism, believed the Straussian notion that lying for their cause was fine, had very dubious and self serving interests in starting wars, and proposed outcomes that were laughably naive)

CONSPIRACY

We need to start with the term conspiracy. If there are no conspiracies, if all conpiracies are non-existant paranoid delusions, then all theories about any given possible conspiracy are a silly indulgence. So first what is a conspiracy and do they actually exist? Here is a common definition:

conspiracy - noun (plural conspiracies)

a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful. the action of plotting or conspiring: they were cleared of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.

Asking if there are conspiracies is like asking if people lie, steal, or start wars. I think our answer is pretty clear. There are many many conspiracies large and small to circumvent law and the well being of others, almost always for personal gain of those involved, but sometimes for ideological reasons. Every criminal act by 2 or more starts as a conspiracy.

One of the main contentions against conspiracy theories is that conspiracies cannot be large because people do not keep secrets well. This is shoddy thinking. In many of the worst and largest conspiracies, secrecy is either not needed, or the needed secrecy can be confined to a small group. The concentration camps of the Nazis were not publicly announced, the bombing of Cambodia in the Vietnam war was kept secret from the public, the catholic leaders hid widespread rape by priests, the investment bankers who got AAA ratings for shoddy real estate loans kept their ponzi scheme on the qt. If a large armed group with a unifying identity( a nation, religious sect or your standard horde) wants land and needs to remove the inhabitants of the land to get it for themselves they can generate a mythology that justifies the theft and simply exteerminate or marginalize the occupants. This is exactly what happened in the United States to the tribal peoples of Turtle Island and what happened globally in various forms throughout the age of European colonialism. Eventually the criminality of all these conspiracies was revealed, though only in a few cases have the mythologies that fueled them been widely rejected.In fact violent xenophobia and access to guns should have us all thinking about how to address the threat. Robert Anton Wilson actually listed several major historic conspiracies to show that conspiracies happen and sometime conspiracy theories are correct. I rememeber at least one in Italy involving hundreds of secretive insiders.

The other main argument about conspiracy theories is that they foolishly propose a super secretive globally powerful elite who are trying to control everything. (Partly an intellectual inheritance or mirror if you will of the myth of an all powerful God controlling everything) While the current global powers of US militarism and capitalism easily lends credence to that idea, and while there are doubtless many like Henry Kissinger who made shitloads of money channeling these paranoid delusions, this notion of an all powerful elite is not necessary to identify actual conspiratorial plans and actions, and to recognize where things are headed. The Kissinger/CIA operation Condor and subsequent mass killings were predicted and forseen and enacted, and recorded and largely ignored without need to invoke the illuminati, the Rothschilds or alein lizards. Greed, fear, denial, egotism cowardice and apathy are all that is needed. A simple respect for human life could have warned us and prevented this; just as a willingness to listen to the largest global anti-war demonstration in human history could have combined with a skeptical fact checking press and stopped the war in Iraq. The ideas of the Neo Cons should have been exposed and confronted as the highly fascistic conspiratorial criminality and madness they were. In fact the theoretic predictions by anti-war activists of what the war would cost in life and money was very accurate, the thoretic predictions of how it would fail to achive the stated goals was also accurate as were the theories of who would benefit. The fact that the mainstream press failed to take this widespread critical analysis seriously or to admit their mistakes when the accuracy of the leftist analysis proved true only added to the widespread mistrust of official sources and led to a less grounded kind of conspiracy theory ala Alex Jones, climate denial, birthergate, or russiagate. My main point here is that this is very serious stuff and many lives hang in the balance.

THE ROLE OF THEORY WHEN CONSIDERING A POSSIBLE CONSPIRACY

Sanity in the human world requires skepticism about governments, political parties, corporations, religions and other powerful organizations that would recruit us into believing that what they say and what they do is wise, good, true or necessary. Everyone agrees on the importance of this skepticism, the disagreements are about what to trust, what not to trust, and why. The biggest problem with any given conspiracy theory is whether the purveyor of that theory is trustworthy and whether they are encouraging honest open consideration of verifiable and relevant facts. Is the theory open to falsification. Will it admit mistakes? This can get very dicy when the mistakes are large and destructive, or when motives are mixed. There is a lot of money and power to be gained by selling junk to the gullible, and the media tools for doing so are constantly improving.

How does a valid and useful conspiracy theory emerge and are there examples of such theories. I think the case of the Catholic Church’s handling of priests raping children, and the exposure by the Boston Globe qualifies. This abuse had probably been going on for longer than we will ever know but in just recent generatons is illustrative in several ways. First is the way it generates shame and denial in its victims while endorsing the power and positive status of the abusers and those who conspired to cover up the crimes. Only thorough research by journalists willing to risk anger and outrage in a very catholic city revealed that there was more than an isolated incident and showed that priests were being moved around by bishops and cardinals to cover their crimes. There is a pattern here. First there are too many coincidences to ignore, then there is research based on a theory, and ultimately the process spreads around the world exposing a conspiracy of immense proportions and forcing major institutional change, reparations and greater transparency. Another example follows a different path but with similarities.. This was the theory held by anti-vietnam war activists that the FBI had illegally infiltrated and sought to undermine and incriminate anti war activists engaged in lawful dissent and organizing. A handful of activists in Pennsylvania decided to break into an FBI building, steal files and see if there was evidence for this theory. It was a big personal risk but they did find enough evidence to ultimately, through many other efforts expose a large secret program called cointelpro with many criminal aspects. Again the evidence looked like more than a coincidental pattern and generated a theory of conspiracy that led to exposure of facts supporting the theory , and exposing its dimensions to the public leading to at least some temporary reform. Unfortunately in the longer term it has led to an extreme crackdown on whistleblowers, leaked information and investigative journalism of the type done by Sy Hersch.

Expand full comment
Chris Mays's avatar

I find this non-pathologizing discussion helpful, being conspiracy-challenged to my core. To belong, to be initiated, to be in the know and on the inside; these are motivations for which I have empathy. I may not escape the lemming stampedes, but I'm proud my thirst for Kool-Aid is still nil.

Expand full comment
15 more comments...

No posts