Conspiracies: The Facts * the Theories * the Evidence (3 page)

deserve serious attention.

ii) Why Do people Believe in

ConspiraCy Theories?

The Conspiracy Mindset

These pages are not the place for a detailed psychological analysis of the polarized mindsets which traditional y come head to head

over conspiracy. But a brief summing up may be valuable.

The academic position on conspiracy believers can largely be

summarized thus:

• They exhibit signs of mental instability, often having

resentment towards authority, usual y rooted in childhood

experiences and family dysfunction. This leads them to

8

Conspiracy.indd 8

23/10/2012 15:42:19

what is conspiracy theory?

blame others for all personal setbacks and to develop an

eventual blanket suspicion towards authority figures on a

global scale.

• They usual y lack the quality of discernment and have

low ‘acceptance thresholds’ of what they consider to be

convincing evidence; i.e. they have a tendency towards

gullibility (Cass Sunstein and Professor Adrian Vermeule

describe this as a ‘crippled epistemology’, whereby beliefs

are based on very limited information) and see patterns in

events (‘apophenia’) that are not real y there or, conversely,

they draw sweeping conclusions from isolated anomalies

taken out of context.

• Their lack of discernment makes them prone to ‘social

cascades’ whereby the more people around them who hold

to a certain view, the more likely it is that they will adopt

the same belief, regardless of the weakness of the original

evidence.

• Their tendency to question the official position in one area

leads to a pathological inability to believe any scenario

presented by the establishment, creating a general bent

towards fanatical views and, in extreme cases, leading to

anti-social behaviour or even involvement in terrorism in a

misguided attempt to ‘correct’ situations.

• The perceived social isolation created by their ‘unusual’ views on the world is seemingly remedied if they become fervently

dedicated to either actual or online communities that share

the same focused views. This restricts their exposure to other

ideas or evidence which might challenge their viewpoint and

thus increases the tendency towards extremism.

More could be added to this list, but it distils the main points which tend to come up in most psychological treatises on the conspiracy mindset. Deep down, elements of all these may well contribute

to the psychological make-up of many truthseekers. However, to

9

Conspiracy.indd 9

23/10/2012 15:42:19

conspiracies

hold to the notion that these questionable attributes are
all
that give rise to conspiracy theories is overly simplistic and pays no heed whatsoever to the more empirical events and situations that

such minds are drawn to point out do actual y occur all around us.

A similar list outlining the personality patterns of academics

and psychologists might well uncover just as many qualities

that bring into question their own rigid fervour in highlighting

the weaknesses of others. Indeed, further contemplation makes

it quickly apparent that critics of conspiracy theorists are often equal y guilty of narrow-mindedness and of falling prey to

‘social cascades’ among their peer group. It has become a wide

source of amusement, for instance, that arch-sceptic Richard

Dawkins cannot see, as most outside observers can, that his fiery determination to destroy belief in religion, astrology or mysticism is as generical y fanatical as that displayed by his targets.

In opposition to the academic position, the conspiracy believers

themselves – whatever psychology may drive them – consider that

their stance is valid, based on actual evidence that their critics seem reluctant to address.

The theorists’ position on their own basic beliefs can be

summarized thus:

• They have the ability to see glaring anomalies in official

situations that the mainstream ignores or avoids, and only

they have the courage to speak out about them.

• They are able to demonstrate that evidence for conspiracies

most certainly does exist, and many examples throughout

history, both ancient and modern, demonstrate clearly the

role that secret cabals have played in nefariously shaping

global events.

• Contemporary institutional corruption is so rife at every

level of societal management, as acknowledged even in the

mainstream media, that the notion that it is
not
also going on at higher levels is blinkered and unrealistic.

10

Conspiracy.indd 10

23/10/2012 15:42:20

what is conspiracy theory?

• The establishment’s continued assault on those who believe

in conspiracies is in itself an indication that a programme

of official distraction and marginalization is in place, thus

giving greater credence to their conviction that important

areas are being covered up and withheld from the public.

• The common but incorrect characterization of all theorists

as being right-wing fanatics or uneducated misfits is

another suspicious demonization, when, in fact, conspiracy

believers hail from all walks of life and are often highly

qualified professionals.

• The accusation that truthseekers crudely take events in

isolation and fashion new conspiracy theories from them

is unfair. They cite instead their identification of
patterns
of related occurrences that go beyond mere chance in

indicating the high probability of wider programmes of

manipulation.

As with the earlier list, it is hard to dismiss every one of these points. It is, after al , clear that we live in a world where we are routinely denied the truth, and that obfuscation and corruption

are very likely endemic at every level. To refute continual y

that this could also be taking place on a larger scale does seem

obstinate beyond wisdom.

Herein lies the problem; both sides of the argument plainly

have something interesting to say, but neither wants to consider

the opposing view, while the general academic opposition to

addressing the evidence for conspiracies has become the subject

of suspicion in its own right.

A long-standing criticism levelled at conspiracy believers is

that their position is too often self-protecting. In other words, the belief that their mainstream marginalization is an institutional plot risks making them impervious to any outside challenges or official denials as they employ the catch-all retort, ‘Wel , you would say that, wouldn’t you?’. However, the academic world can be guilty of 11

Conspiracy.indd 11

23/10/2012 15:42:20

conspiracies

employing similar mechanisms of self-defence. A middle ground

must, surely, be found if the stalemate of the current stand-off is to be broken.

Factions within Factions

One of the inherent difficulties in creating a level plane of

consensus is the tendency of peers to turn against each other,

even within their own social groups. This is especial y true in the alternative realms, where those who hold the most extreme views

on the global conspiracy are prone to accusing more moderate

elements of being ‘shil s’ or ‘working for the other side’. This

hostile intolerance towards any view that does not entirely concur with theirs serves to isolate the extremists further from exposure to any logical argument which might challenge their rigidly fixed beliefs. It also enables them to characterize people who might

otherwise be supportive allies as simply being one more face of

‘the opposition’, creating a world of lazy discrimination in which the crucial art of discernment never has to be nurtured and

polarization is guaranteed. By observing this self-destructive

component, the psychologists admittedly score points, and it

is the loud minority that give the truthseeker movement a bad

name. It is a mistake, however, to tarnish all of its adherents with the same brush when a significant proportion are general y fair in their reasoning.

The fanaticism that generates factional in-fighting often afflicts the more far-right contingencies of conspiracy thinking. For

instance, those who are convinced that the core of the New World

Order plot lies in a fervent Zionist agenda quickly lose patience with others who maintain an open-mindedness about its ultimate

motives. They can be savage in their attacks on supposedly fellow questioners, openly accusing those not ful y in the anti-Zionist

camp of living in fear of the Jewish Anti-Defamation League; or

12

Conspiracy.indd 12

23/10/2012 15:42:20

what is conspiracy theory?

they go a step further and promote their targets as being Mossad

agents and suchlike. This narrow refusal to countenance any belief but their own in turn gives unfortunate fuel to the likes of media pundit David Aaronovitch, whose public attacks on conspiracy

theorists (especial y through his book
Voodoo Histories
)
frequently revolve around the misguided charge that most truthseekers are

inherently anti-Semitic. (The highly contentious area of Zionist

conspiracies is discussed further on pp. 32–4.)

Another major source of in-fighting concerns the paranormal-

versus-geopolitical debate. Some truthers are happy to embrace

extra-terrestrial incursion theories (
see
chapter 7) as part of the possible motives for global cover-ups and political strategies,

while others make great capital of the mysticism within the

forceful secret societies that may underpin the New World Order

(
see
chapter 8). However, those seeking public credibility for more grounded exposés (which have even crept quietly into the

mainstream media in recent years) on outfits such as the crucial y influential but entirely undemocratic Bilderberg Group, and who

wish to keep investigations firmly on a political basis, cringe with embarrassment at those screaming about occult owl ceremonies

(which do in fact occur –
see
pp. 242–3) or infiltration from alien bloodlines among the ruling elite.

Meanwhile, 9/11 truth campaigners – who have presented some

of the most plausible conspiracy hypotheses – can, in turn, find

themselves grappling with a small but loud subsection of theorists who insist that the planes which struck the buildings were in fact holograms, or that secret energy technology must have been used

to bring down the towers, etc. This generates divisive friction,

especial y from conventional scientists who feel they may be

on the cusp of attaining a credibility which is damaged by such

arguments. Some counter that in the absence of establishment

truth, then all possibilities, however novel, must be considered

on an equal basis, but others hoping for even a little mainstream validation soon turn on those they perceive as bringing their

13

Conspiracy.indd 13

23/10/2012 15:42:20

conspiracies

efforts into disrepute, thus creating public squabbles that can risk discrediting the campaigners in outsiders’ eyes yet somehow seem

unavoidable.

Even among the more geopolitical thinkers, hostile subdivisions

can appear. This was il ustrated succinctly by the opening panel

at the 2011 State and Corporate Crimes Against Democracy

conference in London, which turned inwards on itself within

minutes, as one firmly real-world political activist poured scorn on another panellist who risked referring to the ‘Illuminati’, one of the key NWO-related conspiracy staples. Anyone who dared

mention extra-terrestrial agendas would doubtless have been

escorted from the premises.

These internal conflicts among the truth community are

inevitably one of the main difficulties created by the crowding of so many disparate subjects under the sole umbrel a of ‘conspiracy theory’, and those who find the term unbearably claustrophobic

fight tooth and nail to avoid it, usual y to no avail. The regrettable fact is that anything which questions the sanctity of the spoon-fed status quo
is
currently
lumped together in the eyes of the outside world; it is hard to see an immediate solution, until the day that each branch of what is currently seen as ‘fringe’ investigation is afforded its own category of respectable recognition. But such a

development seems some way off yet.

Academic Friction

If factional divisions are prone to erupt between truthseekers,

they are certainly not exclusive to them; conflict can also well up among academics who risk even examining the alternative world.

Investigators who cling firmly to judgemental psychoanalysis

seem safe enough, but those who stray into investigating the actual
evidence
for conspiracy beliefs can soon find themselves ostracized from their peer group if any kind of empathy is expressed.

14

Conspiracy.indd 14

23/10/2012 15:42:20

what is conspiracy theory?

The late Harvard professor of psychiatry, John E Mack, for

example, was professional y secure in his fascination with those

who claimed to have been abducted by extra-terrestrials as long

as his focus lay purely in the realms of personality assessment.

However, when Mack began to use hypnosis to unlock claimed