The Nature of Conspiracy Theories. Michael Butter

1 ‘Everything is planned’, or: What is a conspiracy theory?

Conspiracy theories assert the existence of a covertly operating group of people – the conspirators – who seek, from base motives and by underhand means, to achieve a certain end. The word ‘conspiracy’ comes from the Latin verb conspirare, meaning to be in harmony or act in concert. A conspiracy, whether real or imagined, is therefore never the work of one individual, but always of a group, whether large or small. But conspiracy theories have other typical characteristics, too, which I discuss in the first part of this chapter, once again using the example of Winston Churchill’s text ‘Zionism versus Bolshevism’. I then go on to consider some typologies that have been proposed for the classification of conspiracy theories. In particular, I distinguish between top-down, bottom-up, internal and external varieties, as well as between scenarios centring on a specific event, a specific group of conspirators or a combination of the above. Next, I address the question of what distinguishes the plots alleged by conspiracy theorists from actual conspiracies. I show that conspiracy theories usually imagine far more comprehensive and ambitious – and hence impracticable – plots than actual conspiracies, which are very limited in terms of their scope and objectives. Above all, conspiracy theories assume a false view of people and history in claiming that history can be planned and controlled over any length of time. This leads me to the observation that the term ‘conspiracy theory’, both in everyday parlance and in academic discourse, is nearly always an evaluative concept that is used to discredit the ideas of others – even if they do not display the typical characteristics of conspiracy theories. That said, it is in my view nevertheless possible to use the term neutrally, as I argue in the fourth part of this chapter. Finally, I examine calls to replace the term ‘conspiracy theory’ with ‘conspiracy ideology’. This discussion is limited to German-speaking countries; elsewhere, scholars seem either to have no problem with it or to accept that the term ‘conspiracy theory’ is already so well established that an alternative would fail to catch on anyway. The debate is, notwithstanding, of general interest, since it highlights the question of how far conspiracy theories are in fact theories, and what distinguishes them from scientific theories.

Characteristics

      According to the American political scientist Michael Barkun, conspiracy theories are characterized – in addition to the premise of a group of conspirators – by three basic assumptions: 1) Nothing happens by accident; 2) Nothing is as it seems; 3) Everything is connected. The English historian Geoffrey Cubitt, who formulated another influential definition of conspiracism, takes a very similar view. For him, intentionality, secrecy (which he refers to as occultism) and the dualism of good and evil constitute the essence of conspiracy theory. Intentionality and secrecy correspond almost exactly to Barkun’s first two components in that the conspirators follow a plan and act in secret, while dualism is highlighted elsewhere by Barkun. The conspirators are invariably imagined as evil, and their actions as causing harm to the wider mass of innocent people.¹

      All these characteristics can indeed be found in Churchill’s short text, especially in the paragraph on ‘International Jews’, which I will therefore cite again at greater length:

In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg [sic] (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped

Скачать книгу