Tag Archive

A guest post by Mitnaged

This article is meant to complement Adam Levick’s and to supplement my previous account of a conference I attended in London about conspiracy theories.   It focuses on some of the below the line comments from those who I think show signs of being drawn to conspiracy theories, particularly about Israel and Jews, in their own words.

In my previous account I summarised the main entrenched beliefs of those who are likely to fall for conspiracy theories, namely that:

Everything is evil – there is invariably an assumption of malign intent (whereas, commonsensically, some conspiracy theories may be benign);

They reach far beyond the everyday – they are invariably over the top.

They evidence indiscriminate distrust – of the government, of other allegedly powerful groups

Every official explanation is a lie – “That’s what they want us to believe” and theorists do not believe evidence-based consensus. 

Everything is intended – there is the  assumption of hyper-competence on the part of conspirators who are perceived to be all-powerful – and that nothing happens by accident.

Everything is significant – inherent grandiosity of any theory.  (Real conspiracies are, by contrast, limited in scope)

Heroic strivings to seek out evidence – in the absence of positive objective proof

Small anomalies are imbued with crucial significance.

They are self-insulating and therefore very resistant to change, and are sealed off from impartial examination of the evidence, and they arise even before the full facts are known.

My focus is on the below the line comments to Jon Ronson’s articles on CiF about the internet  There is necessarily a small selection of the comments (I could, as they say, have gone on and on collecting more but am limited by space here) which evidence their writers’ lack of insight and critical thinking, the tendency to confuse thoughts and opinions with facts and to overgeneralise from the particular – all of which leave them wide open to be ensnared by conspiracy theories if they are not ensnared already.  Levick has already pointed up the role of CiF in cranking up the fears of these people and readers are cordially invited, if they feel so inclined, to play “spot the conspiracy theorist” below the line throughout CiF and to share their findings here.

Having said all that, readers should note how glad I am to have been able to include here some comments which evidence that their writers are capable of questioning and critical thought.

Dealing first with Part 1 of Esc Control on CiF:

Opportunities for paranoia begin in the first video – Ronson wants to make a film not to see whether people are trying to control the internet – his hypothesis is that they are trying to control it.  Note the buzz words -  “Clash of ideologies”,   “secret ways to control the internet”  but at least he admits that that point of view may be paranoid.

Nevertheless he plays on insecure people’s profound discomfort with “not knowing”, their lack of basic trust, their sense of powerlessness, their having an external locus of control, all of which can set vulnerable people up to see conspiracies where there are none.

And this first article succeeds in doing all that below the line, although this poster later asks Ronson for more information too:

these 

(Note that this person says he/she is not being paranoid, but note also the extreme language – that the internet has been “disabled” (but doesn’t say how) in order to “stop communication” (but doesn’t give examples).

The following may well not be from a conspiracy theorist  – it’s tempting to believe that he may have a point, not least because of the lack of rant and that his assumptions are precisely that – very importantly he does not claim that they are facts:

The next is a classic illustration of how CiF article has provided the fertile ground which attracts those unhealthily inclined to swallow conspiracy theories whole.   Note the reference to the ubiquitous “they” without mentioning who “they” are and how he knows that there is a “they”.  Note also “Wait till it happens to you…..” without describing what exactly happened to him:

The following seems a very sane and pertinent point, in contrast to jockyscot’s.   Note the wording – he wants to “explore” this “apparent” abuse of power (ie he is willing to admit doubt); and again he recognises that his is a hypothesis/supposition rather than a fact:

In the following example the poster suggests that we are all watching each other.  Not strictly within the realms of conspiracy theory perhaps but this person should be careful not to let imagination become fact without proof:

Read the rest of this entry »