Why conspiracy theories won’t go away and what do about it.
Imagine a world at the verge of being taken over by a secretive group of powerful individuals and corporations. Operating in the shadows, they have for decades been plotting to subvert our rights and freedoms so as to further their dark designs. Their goal is to establish a global order in which they hold ultimate power over all of us. Manipulated by the media, most people don’t see that many of our governments are already under their thumb. It is nearly too late to stop them. Humanity’s last hope lies in a rag-tag group of intellectual mavericks, who have seen through those evil plans. Guided by a firm belief in the righteousness of their cause, they are building a network spanning the globe. Hopelessly outnumbered and outgunned, they are nevertheless determined to resist, because the alternative is unthinkable. To this band of free-thinking luminaries, serfdom is not an option. They have been laying low for long enough. The time has come to strike back. The fate of humanity lies in their hands.
Unfortunately, it seems like a growing number of people believes this worrying scenario to be an accurate description, not of the latest Dan Brown novel, but of reality. You might wonder why this is a cause for concern. Why worry about some conspiracy theorists making fools of themselves? The issue with such beliefs is their potential to influence action. For a true believer, convinced that a global conspiracy is responsible for the deaths of millions, refraining from action seems positively immoral. Wouldn’t you think you have a duty to stop this mass-murder? At which point does resistance become a duty? As long as the group of people buying into these stories remains small, the risk posed by them can be controlled. However, studies even before the Covid-19 pandemic have shown that a growing chunk of the population believes in conspiracy theories. The fact that this trend exists even in relatively stable countries like Germany, where unemployment is at historic lows is worrying. How can the rise of conspiracy theories be explained, and what can we do about it?
Theorists and Believers
Before we start our discussion on conspiracy theories, it is worth asking whether they really are “theories” at all. The term “theory” is defined as “a statement of ideas that are suggested to explain a fact or event”[1]. When we think of theories, Darwin’s theory of evolution and Einstein’s theory of relativity come to mind. The critical difference between those two and conspiracy “theories” is that the latter are not falsifiable. Their proponents do not “suggest” them “to explain a fact or event” at all. Instead of discarding or adjusting their theories according to experimental results, they adjust the experimental results to match their so-called theories. Instead of suggesting theories, they actually believe narratives. The dictionary definition of “narrative” as “a particular way of explaining or understanding events” matches the phenomenon we are looking at much more closely. By using the term “conspiracy narratives” we can avoid being misled as to the nature of the beliefs we are dealing with. In fact, this fundamental misunderstanding might lie at the bottom of our failure to tackle conspiracy narratives so far.
In science, theories are used to find the truth and increase our understanding of the universe. The scientific method has led to such rapid gains in knowledge that humanity in the 21st century looks set to send a manned mission to Mars. We managed to achieve this stunning level of technological sophistication because generations of scientists have extracted and multiplied scientific knowledge by testing and refining their theories. Today, we know that the earth revolves around the sun just like we know that doing excessive amounts of cardio is bad for your gains[2]. Based on established facts, scientists around the world further theorize and test their theories in order to find a vaccine for Covid-19, cure cancer and do many other useful things we can all get behind. Beyond making possible cutting-edge research, established facts also serve as a basis for our value judgements and opinions. Distinguishing between facts and value judgements is crucial, and it might be here that conspiracy narratives pull the wool over our heads.
Every time you use your smartphone to get somewhere you can choose to take the scenic route or to just get to your destination as fast as possible. None of the two choices is inherently right or wrong. You can choose freely according to your personal preference. If, however, the map isn’t quite up to date and you drive into a construction site, the map will have been mistaken. While you can argue about which of the two routes to choose, you can’t legitimately dispute the reality of the construction site you just drove into. Maybe you value a leisurely drive over a shorter one. Whatever your choice, you can only succeed based on an accurate map. Having a common framework of established facts (the map) is a necessary precondition for reasonable disagreement on value judgements (personal preference for one of the two routes). Whereas debate on the latter is healthy for democracy, debating established facts is dangerous because it destroys common ground. Debates with conspiracy believers feel like trying to explain to someone how to get from A to B when they doubt that there really is a point A at all. Conspiracy narratives target our common reality by making established fact a matter of debate. Usurping the power to change reality, these narratives focus on the parts of reality that are particularly uncomfortable. It’s when life is hard that people are most likely to enter the land of make-believe.
Everything happens for a reason?
Looking back at history we can see that conspiracy narratives flourish in chaos. Whenever something unpredictable has a big impact on society, “theories” explaining the event soon multiply. Potential triggers include both man-made and natural disasters. With more than half of all Americans believing one of the numerous conspiracy narratives surrounding 9/11[3], the attacks on the World Trade Centre seem to be the most prominent such narratives of our generation. The Corona pandemic currently shaking-up the world serves as an example of a natural disaster giving rise to countless, often contradictory narratives. What unites man-made disasters with a natural catastrophe like the pandemic is that they take most of us by surprise, create arbitrary suffering and lead to immediate large-scale responses. In moments like these, chaos invades our neatly scheduled everyday lives. We are reminded in the most unpleasant ways possible of our very limited ability to control our environments. It’s a rude awakening for people used to marvelling at the latest advances in technology. How could a country that will soon send a rocket to Mars be unable to protect itself from a virus? How can it be that the strongest military the world has ever seen was unable to stop a handful of religious fanatics? The good news is that there are ways to deal with chaos when it comes knocking. The bad news is that, like with so many things in life, the easy way, the quick-fix, is not the wiser one.
Why is there arbitrary suffering? This is a question that will confront all of us sooner or later in life. Going back all the way to the Book of Job, religious and philosophical traditions have tried to provide answers and consolation. What the story of Job and secular philosophies like Stoicism have in common is that, rather than denying our limitations, they double down on them. In the Old Testament for example, God assumes the form of a whirl-wind and envelops Job before telling him that he quite literally lacks standing to question his creator. The message is that there simply is no way mere mortals could hope to understand the infinitely grand scheme of things. Similarly, the Stoics taught that focussing on what lies outside our sphere of control is bound to result in frustration. Grounded in the recognition of human limitation, these traditions teach us to accept uncertainty and focus instead on what we can control – our attitudes and reactions. While immersing oneself in this rich tradition is very rewarding, it is a journey that takes time. What’s more, it doesn’t tell you who to blame. Instead of pointing the finger at someone or something, you’ll be left to grapple with your own weakness and limitation. Once disaster strikes, people might not have the patience for what might seem like abstract ideas. When your world collapses, the need for an explanation is immediate. It nearly feels like an annoying load strapped to your back. Instead of carrying it and getting stronger over time you might be tempted to just throw it down at someone else’s feet.
The instinctive human reaction to chaos is to look for intention. If your ship is caught up in a storm at sea, you wonder what you might have done to anger Poseidon. If your harvest failed, you better try to win over Demeter. Looking back at ancient stories of jealous gods manipulating their human playthings, we feel like we’ve long since left behind such childishness. Modern man has no time for the gods. Our smugness is however regularly wiped off our faces when we are ourselves confronted with the unexpected. In the face of arbitrary suffering, we instinctively resort to looking for some intention behind it. The more terrible an event, the less likely it is a fluke. Someone must have pulled the strings.
The Satisfaction of Blame
Imagine you are a medieval merchant whose entire family just died of the plague. You’re now looking for reasons. Your country’s most prestigious scholars debate whether the disease was caused by a special constellation of Jupiter, Mars and Saturn or by earthquakes releasing evil humours[4]. These fancy theories, however are too abstract to be convincing. A catastrophe like this cannot have been brought about by the heavenly bodies. It must have been orchestrated by someone truly evil- an enemy of god. It is no coincidence that throughout medieval Europe outbreaks of the plague were reliably followed by pogroms against local Jewish communities. People carrying the question of who to blame like a load on their backs and reliably dumped it on whoever happened to be the most obvious “other” at hand. Dumping this blame on a group of people feels reassuring at first. Now, your world has become predictable again. Your anger now has a target. Making your victim of choice suffer is also much easier than coming to terms with the fact that you live in a fundamentally uncertain world.
When a public person dies in an accident or is assassinated we similarly tend to imagine hidden conspiracies behind the event. The thought of it being the result of a chain of unfortunate coincidences is too much to bear. However, recognising that it’s not just highly publicised tragedies that are the results of chains of coincidences goes a long way towards immunising you from believing conspiracy narratives. The fact that you’re reading these words for example is just as unlikely a result of an infinite chain of cause and effect as J.F. K’s assassination or the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The fact that you live as the person you are is similarly amazing. Does this mean that the Rothschilds ordered me to write this article and set you up? I’ll leave the answer with you.
Human imagination being as powerful as it is, anyone can be called an “evil genius”. Most recently, the Corona pandemic has been variously blamed on Bill Gates, the Chinese government and of course George Soros. Paradoxically, imagining that someone unleashed a natural disaster on the world makes them much more powerful than they actually are. If there really is a group of governments slaughtering hundreds of thousands of innocent people to establish the New World Order, how come they spare those brave individuals who reveal their plans to the public? While it is tempting to laugh at these people, their beliefs can result in violence and should be taken very seriously. The underdogs can only win if they fight harder and shout louder than the “sheeple”. The resulting tendency of conspiracy believers to populate worlds of their own and exchange views with fellow believers worldwide creates a vicious cycle of in-breeding and radicalisation. If we want to throw a wrench into that cycle we need to think about how to reach out to people who are immune to facts and seemingly too far gone. The good news is that there is a rich scientific literature on how to reverse the momentum towards radicalisation and help people moderate their beliefs.
Reaching Out to Believers
What we need most when dealing with conspiracy narratives is humility. No matter how crazy they sound, we need to be humble if we want to be effective. In their brilliant book on “How to Have Impossible Conversations”[5] Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay show that trying to change someone else’s mind on the spot rarely ever works. This is even more so when dealing with people who have centred their entire world around conspiracy narratives. Instead of trying to uproot and replace their entire identity within 10 minutes, we should aim to simply plant the seeds of doubt. If you succeed in making someone less certain that a narrative is true, you have already managed to break the cycle of radicalisation. That person will think about those doubts in his own time, slowly but steadily eroding the foundations of whatever narrative he once used to believe in unquestioningly. Sooner or later, maybe after another round of talking, they will come around. If they do, it is not because you changed their minds. It is because you made it easy for them to change their own minds. Choosing to help people instead of exposing them might get you fewer likes, but it works.
The most important point to bear in mind is that people who believe conspiracy narratives are still people. Remembering this, no matter how insane someone sounds, is absolutely key. You don’t know the personal stories of the people you’re talking to. It is common that people slide down the conspiracy narrative rabbit-hole as a direct result of some personal tragedy. Going through tough times makes us more susceptible to manipulation, especially in the absence of a strong social safety net. Treating people who have taken a wrong turn with respect and kindness is necessary if you want to have a shot at engaging them at all. If, on the other hand, they feel ridiculed and insulted you might as well stop wasting your time.
It’s because connecting on a human level is so important that social-media platforms are uniquely ill-suited for such conversations. Nowhere else is changing your mind so difficult and painful. When everyone is focussed on screaming and embarrassing each other, beliefs harden. Instead, the best way to approach conspiracy believers is old fashioned real-world dialogue.
We all have friends or relatives who enjoy announcing their latest ingenious “theories” to those gathered around. Instead of limiting ourselves to the inevitable awkward silence, we might look for an opportunity to catch up with them afterwards. If you really care about them, you should take their beliefs seriously and intervene before they radicalise any further. Make a point of listening to them. There’s no way you’ll understand where they come from by telling them about yourself. If your aim is to make it easy for them to moderate their beliefs, you need to do the work of paving them a way out of the quagmire they are stuck in. You pave this path by asking genuine questions and listening. Find out how they think and spot the weakest links in their chain of reasoning. Make sure they feel understood and talk to them from the perspective of someone “on their team”. You can use factual inconsistencies and logical non-sequiturs to carefully introduce doubt by asking the right questions. When you feel like you’ve given them enough to chew on, switch the topic of the conversation. It is now up to them to digest the doubts you planted in their minds.
Valuing patience and personal connection, this approach works only on a small scale and offline. It aims at guiding people who have gone off-track back onto our common map of reality. With time and empathy, we might be able to show them that life is exciting enough even without the Illuminati. The question we need to ask ourselves really is: do we just want to enjoy the spectacle, or are we actually going to do something about the rise of conspiracy narratives?
[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/theory
[2] Bro-science has yet to take its rightful place in academia.
[3] https://blogs.chapman.edu/wilkinson/2016/10/11/what-arent-they-telling-us/
[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/middle_ages/blackdisease_01.shtml
https://www.discoverwalks.com/blog/paris/7-facts-about-the-black-death-of-1348-in-paris/
[5] How to Have Impossible Conversations: A Very Practical Guide, Da Capo Lifelong Books (September 17, 2019)
ulyssesblog 