In Defense of the Conspiratorial Worldview

___________________

Conspiracism as part of an anti-regime populist movement works in a different fashion. Populist conspiracism sees secret plots by tiny cabals of evildoers as the major motor powering important historical events. Conspiracism tries to figure out how power is exercised in society, but ends up oversimplifying the complexites of modern society by blaming societal problems on manipulation by a handful of evil individuals. This is not an analysis that accurately evaluates the systems, structures and institutions of modern society. As such, conspiracism is neither investigative reporting, which seeks to expose actual conspiracies through careful research; nor is it power structure research, which seeks to accurately analyze the distribution of power and privilege in a society. Sadly, some sincere people who seek social and economic justice are attracted to conspiracism. Overwhelmingly, however, conspiracism in the U.S. is the central historic narrative of right-wing populism.

much more: http://www.publiceye.org/top_conspire.html

I really think we need to try and make people understand how their strings get pulled, though, and put a stop to the nonsense. When the regular folks stop blaming/hating/fearing each other they'll start to look up at those who gain wealth and power on their backs, and gleefully spill their children's blood to further enrich themselves.

The conspiratorial world view is not nearly as dangerous as the world view that "that could never happen here, not to us" or those people who refuse to believe, regardless of the evidence at hand, anything that didn't come out of the mouth of a governmentally approved authority. The worst that happens with the former is that you have some guy out there with a weird idea of the world - OTOH, think about what happens when people blindly accept and do as they're told.

The conspiratorial world view is not nearly as dangerous as the world view that "that could never happen here, not to us" or those people who refuse to believe, regardless of the evidence at hand, anything that didn't come out of the mouth of a governmentally approved authority.

Critical Thinkers

Are honest with themselves, acknowledging what they do not know, recognizing their limitations, and being watchful of their own errors.

Regard problems and controversial issues as exciting challenges.

Strive for understanding, keep curiosity alive, remain patient with complexity and ready to invest time to overcome confusion.

Set aside personal preferences and base judgments on evidence, deferring judgment whenever evidence is insufficient. They revise judgments when new evidence reveals error.

Are interested in other peoples's ideas, so are willing to read and listen attentively, even when they tend to disagree with the other person.

Recognize that extreme views (whether conservative or liberal) are seldom correct, so they avoid them, practice fairmindedness, and seek a balanced view.

Practice restraint, controlling their feelings rather than being controlled by them, and thinking before acting.


Uncritical Thinkers

Pretend they know more than they do, ignore their limitations, and assume their views are error-free.

Regard problems and controversial issues as nuisances or threats to their ego.

Are impatient with complexity and thus would rather remain confused than make the effort to understand.

Base judgments on first impressions and gut reactions. They are unconcerned about the amount or quality of evidence and cling to earlier views steadfastly.

Are preoccupied with self and their own opinions, and so are unwilling to pay attention to others' views. At the first sign of disagreement they tend to think, "How can I refute this?"

Ignore the need for balance and give preference to views that support their established views.

Tend to follow their feelings and act impulsively.

-Vincent Ryan Ruggiero's opinion

Unfortunately there is a large % that cannot and will not consider that their goverment could be evil.

Debunking Conspiracy Theories
An interview with Chip Berlet
By David Barsamian
Z Magazine, Sept. 2004
http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Sept2004/barsamian0904.html

BERLET: I’m going to make a distinction between conspiracy and conspiracism, which is a way of seeing the world that overvalues the role of individual actors and undercuts any kind of systemic or institutional analysis. Conspiracism sees the world as governed by plots hatched by relatively small groups of people.

...

BERLET: ... For many decades these are right-wing theories that surface against the Jesuits, against Jews, against anarchists, and during the McCarthy period, against Communists. The basic theme is that the reason you’re unhappy with the government is that there are these secret elites who run everything. The original allegations started out with the Illuminati, which is said to be controlling the Freemasons. In the 1900s, this gets changed to the “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion,” a hoax document that alleges that Jews run everything. In the 1950s, it’s all about the Communists and the State Department and the CIA versus the really righteous people in the military and conservative groups. Today it filters down so that a number of progressives have adopted this way of thinking and claim that ever since the JFK assassination the government has been run by a handful of secret elites.

The reason I get so frustrated with this is that we’re sitting here in a library. Just a few feet from us there are 300 or 400 books written by right wingers over the last 50 years making all of these allegations. Then I have a shelf of books by progressives who have adopted this way of thinking and made it a progressive issue by abandoning any kind of systemic institutional or structural analysis.

...

BERLET: ... The problem is that it distracts attention from those things that we could be talking to our neighbors about how society is structured to ensure that a certain number of people are unemployed. Do we like that as a policy for the economy of the United States? Do we like the policy being put forward by the Bush administration of being the global cop of the world? If we go into a political setting and say, “Bush engineered the attack on 9/11,” we are closing the door to reaching into new communities that we can bring into the movement for social change. It is suicidal for progressives to make these outlandish claims on scant, if any, information and documentation when there is so much really good reporting going on.

Conspiracy theorists are right—something is wrong. But we’re not going to change things by running down six white guys drinking bourbon in a basement on Wall Street. We’re going to change things by showing how people are affected by a political and economic system that values wealth and power and privilege and we need to change that to value democracy, diversity, and equality.