| Revision as of 01:47, 22 May 2010 editRolyatleahcim (talk | contribs)400 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:51, 22 May 2010 edit undoLoremaster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers55,226 edits restore: major change undiscussedNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT ] | |||
| :''For a list of conspiracy theories see: ] | |||
| '''Conspiracism''' A world view that centrally places conspiracy theories in the unfolding of history. Throughout human history, some political and economic leaders genuinely ''have'' been the cause of enormous amounts of death and misery, and they sometimes have engaged in conspiracies while at the same time promoting conspiracy theories about their targets. ] and ] would be merely the most prominent examples; there have been numerous others.<ref>{{cite book | last = Arendt | first = Hannah | authorlink = Hannah Arendt | title = The Origins of Totalitarianism | origyear = 1953 | year = 1973 | publisher = Harcourt Brace Jovanovich | location = New York }}</ref> In some cases there have been claims dismissed as conspiracy theories that later proved to be true.<ref>{{cite book | last = Fenster | first = Mark | title = Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture | origyear = 1999 | publisher = University of Minnesota Press | location = Minneapolis }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | |||
| | last = Dean | first = Jodi | title = Aliens in America: Conspiracy Cultures from Outerspace to Cyberspace | origyear = 1998 | publisher = ] | location = Ithaca, NY | |||
| }}</ref> | |||
| As an area of inquiry, ''conspiracism'' was popularized by academic Frank P. Mintz in the 1980s. Academic work in conspiracy theories and conspiracism presents a range of hypotheses as a basis of studying the genre. Among the leading scholars of conspiracism are: Hofstadter, ], ], Robert Alan Goldberg, ], Mark Fenster, Mintz, ], ], and ]. | |||
| The term "conspiracy theory" was originally used neutrally describing any claim of ], ] or ]. However, it has become largely ] and is used now almost exclusively to refer to ]s as explanation for current or historic events. Conspiracy theories are largely viewed with ] by the ] and ], and often ridiculed by pundits because of conspiracy theorists lack of convincing evidence and contrast with ]; which focuses on people's collective behavior in publicly known institutions as recorded in scholarly material and ] reports to explain historical or current events, rather than speculation on the motives and actions of ].<ref name="Barkun 2003">{{cite book| author = Barkun, Micheal | title = A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America | publisher = ]; 1 edition | year = 2003 | isbn = 0520238052}}</ref><ref name="Domhoff 2005">{{cite book| author = Domhoff, G. William | title = Who Rules America? Power, Politics, and Social Change | publisher = McGraw-Hill Humanities/Social Sciences/Languages; 5 edition | year = 2005 | isbn = 0072876255}}</ref> The term is therefore often used dismissively in an attempt to characterize a belief as outlandishly false and held by a person judged to be a ] or a group confined to the ]. Such characterization is often the subject of dispute due to its possible unfairness and inaccuracy.<ref>Fenster, M. 1999. Conspiracy theories: Secrecy and power in American culture. Minneapolis: ].</ref> | |||
| In the United States of the late 20th and early 21st centuries, conspiracy theories have become commonplace in ], which has contributed to conspiracism emerging as a ]. For some, this has contributed to a belief system where democracy is replaced by ] as the dominant paradigm of political action.<ref name="Barkun 2003"/> According to anthropologists Todd Sanders and Harry G. West, "evidence suggests that a broad cross section of Americans today…gives credence to at least some conspiracy theories."<ref>Harry G. West, Todd Sanders. (2003) Duke University Press. pp 4.</ref> Belief in conspiracy theories has therefore become a topic of interest for sociologists, psychologists and experts in ]. | |||
| ==Terminology== | |||
| The term "conspiracy theory" may be a neutral descriptor for any legitimate or illegitimate claim of ], ] or ]. To ''conspire'' means "to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or to use such means to accomplish a lawful end."<ref>Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 243 (8th ed. 1976).</ref> However, conspiracy ''theory'' is also used to indicate a ] ] that includes a broad selection of (not necessarily related) arguments for the existence of grand conspiracies.<ref>Ramsay, Robin (2006). ''Conspiracy Theories'', Pocket Essentials. ISBN 190404865X.</ref> | |||
| The word "]" is, in this usage, sometimes considered to be more informal as in "]" or "]" rather than mainstream ]. Also, the term ''conspiracy'' is typically used to indicate powerful figures, often of ], who are believed to be deceiving the ] at large, as in ]. Although some conspiracies are not actually theories, they are often labeled as such by the general populace. | |||
| The first recorded use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" dates from 1909. Originally it was a neutral term but during the political upheaval of the 1960s it acquired its current derogatory sense.<ref>"20th Century Words" (1999) John Ayto, ], p. 15.</ref> It entered the supplement to the ] as late as 1997.<ref> by Peter Knight, BBC News 7 December 2006.</ref> | |||
| The term "conspiracy theory" is frequently used by scholars and in ] to identify secret military, banking, or political actions aimed at "stealing" ], ], or ], from "the people". Less illustrious uses refer to ] and ] and a variety of explanatory narratives which are constructed with ] flaws.<ref>Johnson, 1983</ref> The term is also used in a ] sense to automatically dismiss claims that are deemed ridiculous, misconceived, paranoid, unfounded, outlandish or irrational. For example, the term "] conspiracy theory" does not refer to the generally accepted version in which several participants actually were convicted of conspiracy, and others pardoned before any charges were filed, but to alternative and additional theories such as claims that that the source(s) of information called "]" was a fabrication.<ref></ref> | |||
| ], in an early essay "adapted from a study prepared for the CIA", attempted to define which beliefs distinguish 'the conspiracy mentality' from 'more conventional patterns of thought'. He defined them as: ''appearances deceive; conspiracies drive history; nothing is haphazard; the enemy always gains power, fame, money, and sex''.<ref>Daniel Pipes, in ''Orbis'', Winter 1992: "Dealing with Middle Eastern Conspiracy Theories".</ref> | |||
| According to West and Sanders, when talking about conspiracies in the Vietnam era, Pipes includes within the fringe element anyone who entertains the thought that conspiracies played a role in the major political scandals and assassinations that rocked American politics in the Vietnam era. "He sees the paranoid style in almost any critical historical or social-scientific analysis of oppression." <ref>Transparency and conspiracy: ethnographies of suspicion in the new world order. Harry G. West, Todd Sanders. pp 207.</ref> | |||
| ==Types== | |||
| Political scientist ] has categorized, in ascending order of breadth, the types of conspiracy theories as follows:<ref name="Barkun 2003"/> | |||
| *''Event conspiracy theories''. The conspiracy is held to be responsible for a limited, discrete event or set of events. The conspiratorial forces are alleged to have focused their energies on a limited, well-defined objective. The best-known example in the recent past is the ] literature. | |||
| *''Systemic conspiracy theories''. The conspiracy is believed to have broad goals, usually conceived as securing control of a country, a region, or even the entire world. While the goals are sweeping, the conspiratorial machinery is generally simple: a single, evil organization implements a plan to infiltrate and subvert existing institutions. This is a common scenario in conspiracy theories that focus on the alleged machinations of ], ], and the ], as well as theories centered on ] or ]. | |||
| *''Superconspiracy theories''. Conspiratorial constructs in which multiple conspiracies are believed to be linked together hierarchically. Event and systemic are joined in complex ways, so that conspiracies come to be nested together. At the summit of the conspiratorial hierarchy is a distant but all-powerful evil force manipulating lesser conspiratorial actors. Superconspiracy theories have enjoyed particular growth since the 1980s, in the work of authors such as ], and ]. | |||
| ==Criticism== | |||
| Conspiracy theories are the subject of broad critique by ], ], and the ]. | |||
| Perhaps the most contentious aspect of a conspiracy theory is the problem of settling a particular theory's truth to the satisfaction of both its proponents and its opponents. Particular accusations of conspiracy vary widely in their plausibility, but some common standards for assessing their likely ] may be applied in each case: | |||
| * ] - does the alternative story explain more of the evidence than the mainstream story, or is it just a more complicated and therefore less useful explanation of the same evidence? | |||
| * ] - do the proofs offered follow the rules of ], or do they employ ]? | |||
| * ] - are the proofs offered for the argument well constructed, i.e., using sound methodology? Is there any clear standard to determine what evidence would prove or disprove the theory? | |||
| * ]s - how many people – and what kind – have to be loyal conspirators? The more wide-ranging and pervasive the conspiracy is alleged to be, the greater the number of people would have to be involved in perpetrating it - is it credible that nobody involved has brought the affair to light? | |||
| * ] - is it possible to demonstrate that specific claims of the theory are false, or are they "unfalsifiable"? | |||
| ], an academic critical of the United States ], contrasts conspiracy theory as more or less the opposite of ], which focuses mostly on the public, long-term behaviour of publicly known institutions, as recorded in, e.g. scholarly documents or ] reports, rather than secretive coalitions of individuals.<ref>{{cite web | url = http://zena.secureforum.com/znet/ZMag/articles/oldalbert19.htm | title = Conspiracy Theory | author = Michael Albert, quoting from Zmagazine | accessdate = 2007-08-23}}</ref> | |||
| According to ] and Matthew N. Lyons "Conspiracism is a particular narrative form of scapegoating that frames demonized enemies as part of a vast insidious plot against the common good, while it valorizes the scapegoater as a hero for sounding the alarm".<ref>{{cite book | last = Berlet | first = Chip | authorlink = Chip Berlet | coauthors = Lyons, Matthew N. | title = Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort | origyear = 2000 | publisher = Guilford Press | location = New York}}</ref> | |||
| The idea that history itself is controlled by large long-standing conspiracies is rejected by historian Bruce Cumings: | |||
| <blockquote>"But if conspiracies exist, they rarely move history; they make a difference at the margins from time to time, but with the unforeseen consequences of a logic outside the control of their authors: and this is what is wrong with 'conspiracy theory.' History is moved by the broad forces and large structures of human collectivities."<ref>{{cite book | last = Cumings | |||
| | first = Bruce | title = The Origins of the Korean War, Vol. II, The Roaring of the Cataract, 1947–1950 | origyear = 1999 | publisher = ] | location = Princeton, NJ | |||
| }}</ref></blockquote> | |||
| ==Controversy== | |||
| Aside from ] over the merits of particular conspiratorial claims, the general discussion of conspiracy theory is ''itself'' a matter of some public contention. | |||
| The term "conspiracy theory" is considered by different observers to be a neutral description for a conspiracy claim, a pejorative term used to dismiss such a claim without examination, and a term that can be positively embraced by proponents of such a claim. The term may be used by some for arguments they might not wholly believe but consider radical and exciting. The most widely accepted sense of the term is that which popular culture and academic usage share, certainly having negative implications for a narrative's probable truth value. | |||
| Conspiracy theorists on the internet are often dismissed as a "fringe" group, but evidence suggests that a broad cross section of Americans today—traversing ethnic, gender, education, occupation, and other divides—gives credence to at least some conspiracy theories.<ref>Transparency and conspiracy: ethnographies of suspicion in the new world order. Harry G. West, Todd Sanders. pp 4.</ref> | |||
| Given this popular understanding of the term, it can also be used illegitimately and inappropriately, as a means to dismiss what are in fact substantial and well-evidenced accusations. The legitimacy of each such usage will therefore be a matter of some controversy. ], in his 1996 essay which examines the role of progressive media in the use of the term, "The JFK Assassination II: Conspiracy Phobia On The Left", states, | |||
| :"It is an either-or world for those on the Left who harbor an aversion for any kind of conspiracy investigation: either you are a structuralist in your approach to politics or a 'conspiracist' who reduces historical developments to the machinations of secret cabals, thereby causing us to lose sight of the larger systemic forces."<ref name="On The Left">, "The JFK Assassination II: conspiracy phobia on the left", Michael Parenti, 1996</ref> | |||
| Structuralist or institutional analysis shows that the term is misused when it is applied to institutions acting in pursuit of their acknowledged goals, e.g. when a group of corporations engage in price-fixing in order to increase profits. | |||
| Complications occurs for terms such as '']'', which literally means "unidentified flying object" but connotes ], a concept also associated with some conspiracy theories, and thus possessing a certain ]. Michael Parenti gives an example of the use of the term which underscores the conflict in its use. He states, | |||
| :"In most of its operations, the CIA is by definition a conspiracy, using covert actions and secret plans, many of which are of the most unsavory kind. What are covert operations if not conspiracies? At the same time, the CIA is an institution, a structural part of the national security state. In sum, the agency is an institutionalized conspiracy."<ref name="On The Left"/> | |||
| The term "conspiracy theory" is itself the object of a type of conspiracy theory, which argues that those using the term are manipulating their audience to disregard the topic under discussion, either in a deliberate attempt to conceal the truth, or as dupes of more deliberate conspirators.{{Citation needed|date=February 2007}} | |||
| When conspiracy theories are offered as official claims (e.g. originating from a governmental authority, such as an intelligence agency) they are not usually considered as conspiracy theories. For example, certain activities of the ] may be considered to have been an official attempt to promote a conspiracy theory, yet its claims are seldom referred to as such. {{Citation needed|date=February 2007}} | |||
| Further difficulties arise from ambiguity regarding the term ]. In popular usage, this term is often used to refer to unfounded or weakly-based speculation, leading to the idea that "It's not a conspiracy theory if it's actually true". | |||
| ==Study of conspiracism== | |||
| In 1936 American commentator ] wrote: | |||
| ::''The central belief of every moron is that he is the victim of a mysterious conspiracy against his common rights and true deserts. He ascribes all his failure to get on in the world, all of his congenital incapacity and damfoolishness, to the machinations of werewolves assembled in Wall Street, or some other such den of infamy.''<ref>H. L. Mencken, ''Baltimore Evening Sun'', June 15, 1936</ref> | |||
| Belief in conspiracy theories has become a topic of interest for sociologists, psychologists and experts in folklore since at least the 1960s, when the ] of US President ] eventually provoked an unprecedented public response directed against the official version of the case as expounded in the Report of the ]. | |||
| ===Psychological origins=== | |||
| According to some ]s, a person who believes in one conspiracy theory tends to believe in others; a person who does not believe in one conspiracy theory tends not to believe another.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Goertzel | year = 1994 | month = | title = ''Belief in Conspiracy Theories'' | journal = Political Psychology | volume = 15 | issue = | pages = 733–744 | doi = 10.2307/3791630| id = | url = http://www.crab.rutgers.edu/~goertzel/conspire.doc | format = | accessdate = 2006-08-07 }}</ref> | |||
| This may be caused by differences in the information upon which parties rely in formulating their conclusions. | |||
| Psychologists believe that the ] is common in conspiracism and the development of conspiracy theories, and may be powerful enough alone to lead to the first formulating of the idea. Once cognized, ] and avoidance of ] may reinforce the belief. In a context where a conspiracy theory has become popular within a social group, ] may equally play a part. Some research carried out at the ], UK suggests people may be influenced by conspiracy theories without being aware that their attitudes have changed. After reading popular conspiracy theories about the ], participants in this study correctly estimated how much their peers' attitudes had changed, but significantly underestimated how much their own attitudes had changed to become more in favor of the conspiracy theories. The authors conclude that conspiracy theories may therefore have a 'hidden power' to influence people's beliefs.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Karen Douglas and Robbie Sutton | year = in press | month = | title = The hidden impact of conspiracy theories: Perceived and actual influence of theories surrounding the death of Princess Diana | journal = Journal of Social Psychology | volume = | issue = | pages = | doi = | id = | url = | format = | unused_data = |accessdate= }}</ref> | |||
| ] argue that even if the ] behind the conspiracy is almost always perceived as hostile there is, often, still an element of reassurance in it, for conspiracy theorists, in part because it is more consoling to think that complications and upheavals in human affairs, at least, are created by human beings rather than factors beyond human control. Belief in such a cabal is a device for reassuring oneself that certain occurrences are not random, but ordered by a human intelligence. This renders such occurrences comprehensible and potentially controllable. If a cabal can be implicated in a sequence of events, there is always the hope, however tenuous, of being able to break the cabal's power - or joining it and exercising some of that power oneself. Finally, belief in the power of such a cabal is an implicit assertion of ] - an often unconscious but necessary affirmation that man is not totally helpless, but is responsible, at least in some measure, for his own destiny.<ref name="Baigent, Leigh & Lincoln 1987">{{cite book| author = Baigent, Michael; Leigh, Richard; Lincoln, Henry | title = The Messianic Legacy | publisher = Henry Holt & Co | year = 1987 | isbn = 0805005684}}</ref> | |||
| ====Projection==== | |||
| Some historians have argued that there is an element of ] in conspiracism. This projection, according to the argument, is manifested in the form of attribution of undesirable characteristics of the self to the conspirators. ], in his essay '']'', stated that: | |||
| <blockquote>...it is hard to resist the conclusion that this enemy is on many counts the projection of the self; both the ideal and the unacceptable aspects of the self are attributed to him. The enemy may be the cosmopolitan intellectual, but the paranoid will outdo him in the apparatus of scholarship... the Ku Klux Klan imitated Catholicism to the point of donning priestly vestments, developing an elaborate ritual and an equally elaborate hierarchy. The John Birch Society emulates Communist cells and quasi-secret operation through "front" groups, and preaches a ruthless prosecution of the ideological war along lines very similar to those it finds in the Communist enemy. Spokesmen of the various fundamentalist anti-Communist "crusades" openly express their admiration for the dedication and discipline the Communist cause calls forth.</blockquote> | |||
| Hofstadter also noted that "sexual freedom" is a vice frequently attributed to the conspiracist's target group, noting that "very often the fantasies of true believers reveal strong sadomasochistic outlets, vividly expressed, for example, in the delight of anti-Masons with the cruelty of Masonic punishments."<ref>Hofstadter, Richard. The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Harper's Magazine, November 1964, pp. 77–86.</ref> | |||
| According to Mintz, conspiracism denotes: "belief in the primacy of conspiracies in the unfolding of history":<ref>{{cite book | last = Mintz | first = Frank P. | title = The Liberty Lobby and the American Right: Race, Conspiracy, and Culture | publisher = Greenwood | location = Westport, CT | isbn = 0-313-24393-X | page = 4 | year = 1985 | unused_data = | origyear 1985 =}}</ref><blockquote>"Conspiracism serves the needs of diverse political and social groups in America and elsewhere. It identifies elites, blames them for economic and social catastrophes, and assumes that things will be better once popular action can remove them from positions of power. As such, conspiracy theories do not typify a particular epoch or ideology".<ref>{{cite book | last = Mintz | first = Frank P. | title = The Liberty Lobby and the American Right: Race, Conspiracy, and Culture | publisher = Greenwood | location = Westport, CT | isbn = 0-313-24393-X | page = 199 | year = 1985 | unused_data = |origyear = 1985 }}</ref></blockquote> | |||
| ====Epistemic bias==== | |||
| {{rquote|right|Conspiracy theories are popular because no matter what they posit, they are all actually comforting, because they all are models of radical simplicity.|Novelist ], October 2007.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thetyee.ca/Books/2007/10/18/WillGibson/ |work=] |date=October 18, 2007 |accessdate=January 2, 2010 |last=Beers |first=David |title=William Gibson Hates Futurists}}</ref>}} | |||
| It is possible that certain basic human ] biases are projected onto the material under scrutiny. According to one study humans apply a 'rule of thumb' by which we expect a significant event to have a significant cause.<ref>"," The British Psychological Society, March 18, 2003 (accessed June 7, 2005).</ref> The study offered subjects four versions of events, in which a foreign president was (a) successfully assassinated, (b) wounded but survived, (c) survived with wounds but died of a heart attack at a later date, and (d) was unharmed. Subjects were significantly more likely to suspect conspiracy in the case of the 'major events' — in which the president died — than in the other cases, despite all other evidence available to them being equal. | |||
| Another epistemic 'rule of thumb' that can be misapplied to a mystery involving other humans is ]? (who stands to gain?). This sensitivity to the hidden motives of other people may be an evolved and universal feature of human consciousness. However, this is also a valid rule of thumb for detectives to use when generating a list of suspects to investigate. Used in this way "Who had the motive, means and opportunity?" is a perfectly valid use of this rule of thumb.{{Citation needed|date=March 2009}} | |||
| ====Clinical psychology==== | |||
| For some individuals, an obsessive compulsion to believe, prove or re-tell a conspiracy theory may indicate one or more of several well-understood psychological conditions, and other hypothetical ones: ], ], ], ].<ref>"," ''The New Disease: A Journal of Narrative Pathology'' 2 (2004), (accessed June 7, 2005).</ref> | |||
| ===Socio-political origins=== | |||
| ] represents conspiracy theories as the 'exhaust fumes of democracy' {{Citation needed|date=February 2010}}, the unavoidable result of a large amount of information circulating among a large number of people. Other{{Who|date=February 2010}} social commentators and sociologists argue that conspiracy theories are produced according to variables that may change within a democratic (or other type of) society. | |||
| Conspiratorial accounts can be emotionally satisfying when they place events in a readily-understandable, moral context. The subscriber to the theory is able to assign moral responsibility for an emotionally troubling event or situation to a clearly-conceived group of individuals. Crucially, that group ''does not include'' the believer. The believer may then feel excused of any moral or political responsibility for remedying whatever institutional or societal flaw might be the actual source of the dissonance.<ref>{{cite news |first = Shankar | |||
| |last = Vedantam |url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/04/AR2006060400618.html |title = Born With the Desire to Know the Unknown |work = The Washington Post |publisher = The Washington Post |page = A02 |date= 2006-06-05 |accessdate = 2006-06-07}}"Conspiracy theories explain disturbing events or social phenomena in terms of the actions of specific, powerful individuals," said sociologist Theodore Sasson at Middlebury College in Vermont. By providing simple explanations of distressing events — the conspiracy theory in the Arab world, for example, that the ], attacks were planned by the Israeli Mossad — they deflect responsibility or keep people from acknowledging that tragic events sometimes happen inexplicably."</ref> | |||
| Where responsible behavior is prevented by social conditions, or is simply beyond the ability of an individual, the conspiracy theory facilitates the emotional discharge or ] that such emotional ''challenges'' (after ]){{Citation needed|date=June 2007}} require. Like ]s, conspiracy theories thus occur more frequently within communities that are experiencing ] or political dis-empowerment. | |||
| Mark Fenster argues that "just because overarching conspiracy theories are wrong does not mean they are not on to something. Specifically, they ideologically address real structural inequities, and constitute a response to a withering civil society and the concentration of the ownership of the ], which together leave the political subject without the ability to be recognized or to signify in the public realm" (1999: 67). | |||
| Sociological historian Holger Herwig found in studying German explanations for the origins of ]: | |||
| :''Those events that are most important are hardest to understand, because they attract the greatest attention from myth makers and charlatans.''{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} | |||
| This normal process could be diverted by a number of influences. At the level of the individual, pressing psychological needs may influence the process, and certain of our universal mental tools may impose ] 'blind spots'. At the group or sociological level, historic factors may make the process of assigning satisfactory meanings more or less problematic. | |||
| Alternatively, conspiracy theories may arise when evidence available in the public record does not correspond with the common or official version of events. In this regard, conspiracy theories may sometimes serve to highlight 'blind spots' in the common or official interpretations of events (Fenster, 1999). | |||
| Conspiracy theorists on the internet are often dismissed as a "fringe" group, but evidence suggests that a broad cross section of Americans today believe in some conspiracy theories. | |||
| ====Media tropes==== | |||
| Media commentators regularly note a tendency in news media and wider culture to understand events through the prism of individual agents, as opposed to more complex structural or institutional accounts.<ref>Ivan Emke, "," ''Canadian Journal of Communication'' 25, no. 3 (2000), (accessed June 7, 2005).</ref> If this is a true observation, it may be expected that the audience which both demands and consumes this emphasis itself is more receptive to personalized, ]tic accounts of social phenomena. | |||
| A second, perhaps related, media trope is the effort to allocate individual responsibility for negative events. The media have a tendency to start to seek culprits if an event occurs that is of such significance that it does not drop off the news agenda within a few days. Of this trend, it has been said that the concept of a pure accident is no longer permitted in a news item.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4217024.stm | title = The Blame Game | date = 6 September 2005 | accessdate = 2007-08-23 | work=BBC News}}</ref> Again, if this is a true observation, it may reflect a real change in how the media consumer perceives negative events. | |||
| Hollywood motion pictures and television shows perpetuate and enlarge belief in conspiracy as a standard functioning of corporations and governments. Feature films such as ] and ], among scores of others, propound conspiracies as a normal state of affairs, having dropped the idea of questioning conspiracies typical of movies of eras prior to about 1970. Shooter even contains the line, "that is how conspiracies work" in reference to the JFK murder. Interestingly, movies and television shows do the same as the news media in regard to personalizing and dramatizing issues which are easy to involve in conspiracy theories. ] converts the huge problem of the returning injured Vietnam War soldier into the chance that the injured soldier will fall in love, and when he does, the strong implication is that the larger problem is also solved. This factor is a natural outcome of Hollywood script development which wishes to highlight one or two major characters which can be played by major stars, and thus a good way of marketing the movie is established but that rings false upon examination. Further, the necessity to serve up a dubiously justified happy ending, although expected by audiences, actually has another effect of heightening the sense of falseness and contrived stories, underpinning the public's loss of belief in virtually anything any mass media says. Into the vacuum of that loss of belief falls explanation by conspiracy theory. | |||
| Too, the act of dramatizing real or fictional events injects a degree of falseness or contrived efforts which media savvy people today can identify easily. "News" today is virtually always dramatized, at least by pitting "one side" against another in the fictional journalistic concept that all stories must contain "both sides" (as though reality could be reduced to two sides) or by using more intensive dramatic developments similar to feature movies. That is, by obvious dramatizing, the media reinforces the idea that all things are contrived for someone's gain which could be another definition of, at least, political conspiracies theories. | |||
| --Dr. Charles Harpole in "History of American Cinema" Scribner/U. Calif Press. | |||
| ==== Fusion paranoia ==== | |||
| ], a '']'' journalist and critic of ] movements on both the left and right, coined the term "fusion paranoia" to refer to a political convergence of left-wing and right-wing activists around anti-war issues and ], which he claimed were motivated by a shared belief in conspiracism or ] views. | |||
| ]s have adopted this term to refer to how the synthesis of paranoid conspiracy theories, which were once limited to American fringe audiences, has given them mass appeal and enabled them to become commonplace in ], thereby inaugurating an unrivaled period of people actively preparing for ] ] scenarios in the ] of the late 20th and early 21st centuries. They warn that this development may not only fuel ] but have devastating effects on American political life, such as the rise of a revolutionary ] movement capable of ] the established political powers.<ref>Barkun, Michael. 2003. ''A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America''. Berkeley: Univ. of California.</ref> | |||
| ] wrote in a 2004 ] article titled ''Fusion Paranoia'': | |||
| {{quote|Fears of a petty conspiracy – a political rival or business competitor plotting to do you harm – are as old as the human psyche. But fears of a grand conspiracy – that the Illuminati or Jews plan to take over the world – go back only 900 years and have been operational for just two centuries, since the French Revolution. Conspiracy theories grew in importance from then until World War II, when two arch-conspiracy theorists, Hitler and Stalin, faced off against each other, causing the greatest blood-letting in human history. This hideous spectacle sobered Americans, who in subsequent decades relegated conspiracy theories to the fringe, where mainly two groups promoted such ideas. | |||
| The politically disaffected: Blacks (Louis Farrakhan, Cynthia McKinney), the hard Right (John Birch Society, Pat Buchanan), and other alienated elements (Ross Perot, Lyndon LaRouche). Their theories imply a political agenda, but lack much of a following. | |||
| The culturally suspicious: These include "Kennedy assassinologists," "ufologists," and those who believe a reptilian race runs the earth and alien installations exist under the earth's surface. Such themes enjoy enormous popularity (a year 2000 poll found 43 percent of Americans believing in UFOs), but carry no political agenda. | |||
| The major new development, reports Barkun, professor of political science in the Maxwell School at Syracuse University, is not just an erosion in the divisions between these two groups, but their joining forces with occultists, persons bored by rationalism. Occultists are drawn to what Barkun calls the "cultural dumping ground of the heretical, the scandalous, the unfashionable, and the dangerous" – such as spiritualism, Theosophy, alternative medicine, alchemy, and astrology. Thus, the author who worries about the Secret Service taking orders from the Bavarian Illuminati is old school; the one who worries about a "joint Reptilian-Bavarian Illuminati" takeover is at the cutting edge of the new synthesis. These bizarre notions constitute what the late Michael Kelly termed "fusion paranoia," a promiscuous absorption of fears from any source whatsoever.<ref name="Pipes 2004">{{cite paper| author = Pipes, Daniel | title = Fusion Paranoia | year = 2004 | url = http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/jpost/access/525174951.html?dids=525174951:525174951&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jan+14%2C+2004&author=DANIEL+PIPES&pub=Jerusalem+Post&edition=&startpage=13&desc=Fusion+paranoia | accessdate = 2009-06-11}}</ref>}} | |||
| The historian ] addressed the role of ] and conspiracism throughout ] in his essay '']'', published in 1964. ] classic '']'' (1967) notes that a similar phenomenon could be found in America during the time preceding the ]. Conspiracism then labels people's attitudes as well as the type of conspiracy theories that are more global and historical in proportion.<ref>{{cite book | last = Bailyn | first = Bernard | title = ''The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution: | publisher = ] | location = Cambridge | id = ASIN: B000NUF6FQ | isbn = 978-0-674-44302-0 | year = 1992 | unused_data = |origyear 1967=}}</ref> | |||
| ==Political use== | |||
| In his two volume work '']'' Popper used the term "conspiracy theory" to criticize the ideologies driving ], ], and ]{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}}. Popper argued that totalitarianism was founded on "conspiracy theories" which drew on imaginary plots driven by paranoid scenarios predicated on tribalism, chauvinism, or racism. Popper did not argue against the existence of everyday conspiracies (as incorrectly suggested in much of the later literature). Popper even uses the term "conspiracy" to describe ordinary political activity in the ] of ] (who was the principal target of his attack in ''The Open Society & Its Enemies''). | |||
| In his critique of the twentieth century totalitarians, Popper wrote, '''I do not wish to imply that conspiracies never happen. On the contrary, they are typical social phenomena.'''<ref name = "dohloo">{{cite web | url = http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/books/popper_open_society.html | title = Extracts from "The Open Society and Its Enemies Volume 2: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath" by Karl Raimund Popper (Originally published 1945) | publisher = Lachlan Cranswick, quoting Karl Raimund Popper | accessdate = 2007-08-23}}</ref> | |||
| He reiterated his point, "Conspiracies occur, it must be admitted. But the striking fact which, in spite of their occurrence, disproved the conspiracy theory is that few of these conspiracies are ultimately successful. Conspirators rarely consummate their conspiracy."<ref name = "dohloo"/> | |||
| ==Fiction== | |||
| {{Main|Conspiracy fiction}} | |||
| Because of their dramatic potential, conspiracies are a popular theme in ] and ]. Complex history is recast as a ] in which bad people cause bad events, and good people identify and defeat them. Fictional conspiracy theories offer neat, intuitive narratives, in which the conspirators' plot fits closely the dramatic needs of the story's plot. As mentioned above, the ''cui bono?'' aspect of conspiracy theories resembles one element of mystery stories: the search for a possibly hidden motive. | |||
| '']'' was a 1964 comedy about modern nuclear warfare. The end of the world is precipitated by the delusions of General Jack D. Ripper who happens to be in control of a ] nuclear air wing. General Ripper believes there is a ] conspiracy which threatens to "sap and impurify" the "precious bodily fluids" of the American people with ]. | |||
| '']'' is a 1997 thriller about a taxi driver (played by ]) who publishes a newsletter in which he discusses what he suspects are government conspiracies, and it turns out that one or more of them are true. | |||
| '']'' was a popular television show during the 1990s and early 2000s, which followed the investigations of three FBI agents, ], ] and ], who were sometimes helped by a group of conspiracy theorists known as ]. Many of the episodes dealt with a plot for alien invasion overseen by elements of the ] government, led by an individual known only as the ] and an even more mysterious international "Syndicate". The famous tag line of the series, "The Truth Is Out There", can be interpreted as reference to the meaning-seeking nature of the genre ]. | |||
| ]'s novel '']'' is a broad satire on conspiracism in which the characters attempt to construct an all-embracing conspiracy theory starting with the ] and including the ], the ]s, ] enthusiasts, the ]s, and the ]. | |||
| The three-part novel ] by Robert Shea and ] (published in 1975) is a highly satirical, psychedelic novel dealing with complex, Byzantine conspiracies nested within other larger conspiracies—with the scale of the plots and the audacity of their plotters expanding to enfold more and more minds as the story progresses, evolving to wrap itself around many extant conspiracy theories such as the ones revolving around the Bavarian Illuminati, the Masons, the Vatican, the Mafia, governments large and small, and fringe groups of both left and right-wing persuasions. Their plottings merge with the overarching plans of several fictitious organizations—and also an actual "religion" which conceives of itself as a joke (the ].) In an ironic twist of fate, ] may have even caused the development of a real-world Discordian society (which manifests in loose clusters of affiliation, rather than as any formalized group) when the novel's cult success as a countercultural mainstay brought the "holy writ" of the Discordians, the ], out of obscurity over the final three decades of the twentieth century. Shea and Wilson used witty quotes drawn from this comedic pamphlet glorifying ], the Greek goddess of chaos and discord, as opening lines for chapters of the ''Illuminatus!'' books. | |||
| Conspiracy theories have even influenced video games. The critically acclaimed RPG/shooter '']'', and its sequel (albeit to a lesser degree), ''Deus Ex: Invisible War'', draw upon current-day conspiracy theories such as Majestic 12, Area 51, and the Illuminati. | |||
| Other novels, such as ] 2000 controversial book "Angels and Demons" have also popularized the idea of conspiracy theories. The book surrounds the quest of Robert Langdon, a fictional Harvard University symbologist who is bent on uncovering the mysteries of a secret society known as the Illuminati. Brown's novel, and others alike, harp on the ideas of the unknown, a life source for conspiracy theorists. | |||
| ], a political scientist specializing in the study of ] in American culture, notes that a vast popular audience has been introduced by the 1997 film '']'' to the notion that the U.S. government is controlled by a ] in ]s - a view once confined to ].<ref name="Barkun 2003"/> | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| ===Concepts=== | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| ==Notes== | |||
| {{reflist|2}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| * ], "Conspiracy theory" | |||
| * Barkun, Michael. 2003. ''A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America''. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-23805-2 | |||
| * Chase, Alston. 2003. ''Harvard and the Unabomber: The Education of an American Terrorist''. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-02002-9 | |||
| * Fenster, Mark. 1999. ''Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture''. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 0-8166-3243-X | |||
| * Goldberg, Robert Alan. 2001. ''Enemies Within: The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America''. New Haven & London: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-09000-5 | |||
| * ]. 1965. ''The Paranoid Style in American Politics and Other Essays''. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN 0-674-65461-7 | |||
| * Johnson, George 1983. ''Architects of Fear: Conspiracy Theories and Paranoia in American Politics''. Los Angeles: Jeremy P. Tarcher, Inc. ISBN 0-87477-275-3 | |||
| * McConnachie, James. and Robin Tudge, ''The rough guide to conspiracy theories'' (2005) | |||
| * Melley, Timothy. 1999. ''Empire of Conspiracy: The Culture of Paranoia in Postwar America''. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-8606-8 | |||
| * Mintz, Frank P. 1985. ''The Liberty Lobby and the American Right: Race, Conspiracy, and Culture''. Westport, CT: Greenwood. ISBN 0-313-24393-X | |||
| * ]. 1997. ''Conspiracy: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes from''. New York: The Free Press. ISBN 0-684-87111-4 | |||
| * ---. 1998. ''The Hidden Hand: Middle East Fears of Conspiracy''. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0-312-17688-0 | |||
| * ] 1945. ''The Open Society and Its Enemies''. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01968-1 | |||
| * ]. 1993. ''Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK''. New York: The Random House. ISBN 0-385-47446-6 | |||
| * ]. 1996. ''The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark''. New York: The Random House. ISBN 0-394-53512-X | |||
| * ], and John Whalen. 2004. ''The 80 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time''. New York: Citadel Press. ISBN 0-8065-2531-2 | |||
| ==Further reading== | |||
| *{{cite journal|date=Oct. 23, 2009|title=Conspiracy Theories|journal=CQ Researcher|volume=Volume 19,|issue=Number 37|pages=885-908|issn=1056-2036|url=http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/uploadedFiles/news/Conspiracy%20Theories.pdf}} | |||
| * {{citation | |||
| |last=Aaronovitch |first=David| authorlink=David Aaronovitch | |||
| |title= Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History | |||
| |year = 2010 | |||
| |publisher = Riverhead | |||
| |isbn=978-1-59448-895-5}} | |||
| * , Political Research Associates | |||
| * {{cite web | last = Cziesche | first = Dominik | coauthors = Jürgen Dahlkamp, Ulrich Fichtner, Ulrich Jaeger, Gunther Latsch, Gisela Leske, Max F. Ruppert | year = 2003 | url = http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160,00.html | title = Panoply of the Absurd | work = Der Spiegel | publisher = '']'' | accessdate = 2006-06-06}} | |||
| * {{cite web |last = Parsons |first = Charlotte |year = 2001 |url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1561199.stm |title = Why we need conspiracy theories |work = BBC News - Americas |publisher = BBC |accessdate = 2006-06-26 | date=2001-09-24}} | |||
| * {{cite web |first = James B. |last = Meigs |year = 2006 |url = http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4199607.html |title = The Conspiracy Industry | work = Popular Mechanics |publisher = ] | accessdate = 2006-10-13}} | |||
| * {{cite book | author = James McConnachie and Robin Tudge | year = 2005 | title = ''The Rough Guide to Conspiracy Theories'' | publisher = Rough Guides | isbn = 978-1843534457}} | |||
| * {{cite book | editor = Barry Coward | coauthor = Julian Swann |year = 2004 | title = Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theory in Early Modern Europe: From the Waldensians to the French Revolution | publisher = ] | isbn = 0754635643}} | |||
| * {{cite book | editor = Peter Knight | year = 2003 | title = Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia | publisher = ABC-Clio | isbn = 1576078124}} | |||
| * {{cite book | editor = Gordon B. Arnold | year = 2008 | title = Conspiracy Theory in Film, Television, and Politics | page = 200 | publisher = ] | isbn = 0275994627}} | |||
| * West, Harry G. and Todd Sanders (eds) Transparency and Conspiracy: Ethnographies of Suspicion in the New World Order. Durham: ]. ISBN 978-0822330240 | |||
| * {{cite web | first = Floyd | last = Rudmin | year = 2003 | url = http://www.newdemocracyworld.org/conspiracy.htm | title = Conspiracy Theory As Naive Deconstructive History | publisher = newdemocracy.org | accessdate = 2008-04-18}} | |||
| ===Conspiracist literature=== | |||
| * '']''. | |||
| * Balsiger, David W. and Charles E. Sellier, Jr. (1977). ]. Los Angeles: Schick Sun Classic Books. ISBN 1-56849-531-5. | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Bryan | first = Gerald B. | coauthors = Talita Paolini, Kenneth Paolini | authorlink = "I AM" Activity | title = Psychic Dictatorship in America | year = 2000 | origyear = 1940 | publisher = ] | isbn = 0-9666213-1-X}} | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Cooper | first = Milton William | authorlink = William Milton Cooper | title = Behold a Pale Horse | year = 1991 | publisher = Light Technology Publications | isbn = 0-929385-22-5}} | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Icke | first = David | authorlink = David Icke | title = And the Truth Shall Set You Free: The 21st Century Edition | year = 2004 | publisher = Bridge of Love | isbn = 0-9538810-5-9}} | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Levenda | first = Peter | authorlink = Peter Levenda | title = Sinister Forces: Trilogy| year = 2005 | publisher = Trine Day | isbn = 0-9752906-2-2}} | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Marrs | first = Texe | authorlink = Texe Marrs | title = Project L.U.C.I.D.: The Beast 666 Universal Human Control System | year = 1996 | publisher = Living Truth Publishers | isbn = 1-884302-02-5}} | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Pelley | first = William Dudley | authorlink = William Dudley Pelley | title = Star Guests: Design for Mortality | year = 1950 | publisher = Soulcraft Press | location = Noblesville, Indiana}} | |||
| * {{cite book | last = Robertson | first = Pat | authorlink = Pat Robertson | title = ] | year = 1992 | publisher = W Publishing Group | isbn = 0-8499-3394-3}} | |||
| * Wilson, Robert Anton (2002). ''TSOG: The Thing That Ate the Constitution'', Tempe, AZ: New Falcon Publications. ISBN 1-56184-169-2. | |||
| * ] (1984). ''In God's Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I''. New York: ]. ISBN 0-553-05073-7. | |||
| * ''Conspiracies, Conspiracy Theories and the Secrets of 9/11'', by ]. Sees conspiracy as a fundamental principle between cooperation and competition. Proposes a new science of "conspirology." | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| {{Wiktionary|conspiracy theory}} | |||
| * - slideshow by '']'' magazine | |||
| * by Author ] | |||
| * , Stuart J. Murray, "Editorial Introduction: 'Media Tropes'," ''MediaTropes'', Vol. 2, no. 1 (2009): i-x | |||
| * by Alan Kurtz | |||
| * - popular conspiracy theory discussion group | |||
| (]) | |||
| {{Conspiracy theories}} | |||
| {{DEFAULTSORT:Conspiracy Theory}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 01:51, 22 May 2010
Redirect to: