Wild conspiracy theories and conspiracy theory denial have engaged me much more than I expected over the last few months. After some exploration of the topic as part of an Exo Studies course I have a better appreciation for both of the above extremes.
The study was more about the history and psychology of conspiracy theories (narratives about plans to work secretly together towards an unjust or unlawful objective) than diving into all of the current conspiracy rabbit holes.
For me the most interesting points raised during discussion were the following.
- Conspiracy narratives often surface during periods of rapid change and uncertainty. The old 'normals' no longer apply and clear simple explanations of the causes of change and any new ways of thinking or being are not readily available, or if they are, they are not widely understood.
- It usually takes decades for genuine conspiracies to be uncovered. This can happen through investigative journalism and sources such as whistle-blowers, declassified documents or freedom of information requests. It rarely comes from governments or authorities.
- There is a growing distrust of government and authorities. One reason for this is the blatant disproportionate influence on politics of vested interests. Another is the increasingly obvious bias of mainstream media. Ignoring or denying climate change hasn't helped build trust either.
- Conspiracy narratives can be indicative of different worldviews, their underpinning beliefs and assumptions. Alternative narratives can be embedded in counter cultures where the lived experience of people may be quite different to mainstream culture. Many people leave schools and universities with a reductionistic mechanistic worldview that goes back several centuries.
- Higher levels of education do not necessarily make people less susceptible to either wild conspiracy theories or conspiracy theory denial. Responses to conspiracy theories have more to do with emotional triggers, worldviews or uncomfortable rapid change.
- It's very likely that government authorities and other organisations use the 'conspiracy theory' label to discredit people who know too much or have seen too much. Some organisations probably create sophisticated conspiracy theories as a disinformation strategy. A few conspiracies have probably been created just for fun to 'prove' how gullible people can be.
- Conspiracy theories suggesting elaborate secret collusion are probably more likely to be complicit behaviour driven by personal self-serving agenda such as financial profit. Even diverse self-serving agenda based within similar worldviews may reinforce detrimental consequences and give the illusion of grand scale secret collusion.
- Compelling conspiracy narratives often contain partial truths. People resonate with the partial truth and often assume the rest of the narrative is correct.
- Wild conspiracy theories and conspiracy theory denial can trigger fear or victimhood which then heighten emotional responses and decrease the likelihood of rational discourse.
- Delving into the details of most conspiracy narratives can be very unproductive. A more productive approach is to recognise that there's probably an element of truth to most conspiracy narratives. In addition many sophisticated conspiracy narratives are carefully constructed to trigger emotions, increase polarisation and deceive.
