Jonathan Kay: "Among the Truthers"
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-05-12/jonathan-kay-among-truthers
Throughout American history, conspiracy theories have flourished as a way to explain pivotal events: the Kennedy assassination, Pearl Harbor, and the moon landing. But in the decade since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the number of those who believe in such theories has blossomed. Diane and her guest take an in-depth look at the underground world of conspiracy theorists.
Guests
Jonathan Kay
managing editor, columnist, and blogger at Canada's "National Post" newspaper.
Program Highlights
The New Rise of the Conspiracy Theory
Have conspiracy theories been gaining momentum in the past several years? Why do there seem to be so many conspiracy theories gaining traction these days?
"Conspiracy theories always flourish in the aftermath of great traumas...and America is a very traumatized place right now," author Jonathan Kay said. In addition, the mainstream media used to have fairly good control over the flow of information, but the Internet has drastically shifted this power.
Diane wondered if the theorists believe what they're saying. Kay says he believes most do, with the possible exception of Donald Trump, who he says has made a marketing campaign out of false information (most recently centered around planting doubt in the public mind about President Obama's country of birth).
The "Need to Recreate History"
Conspiracy theories can be a tool to write history according to an individual's ideological script, Kay says.
Conspiracy theorists are bi-partisan, Kay says, as evidenced by the group of 9/11 "truthers" who tend to ascribe to extremely left-wing ideology; and "birthers," or those who question President Obama's U.S. citizenship, who ascribe to right-wing ideology.
Every conspiracy theory has some grain of truth to it, Kay said, and in the end, that's ultimately what makes the theory credible.
Keeping Secrets
Watergate and Iran-Contra were fairly limited, and even so, people have a hard time keeping secrets. "The problem that most people have with ambitious conspiracy theories is that people are just really bad at keeping secrets," Kay said.
JFK's assassination is obviously a special topic, Kay says. In that case, it's impossible to disprove the conspiracy theory, and that's why it's so tantalizing. There really could have been someone else acting with Oswald. You can't put JFK in the same category as 9/11 or the birther movement, because there really could have been someone else," Kay said.
There are so many places a person who has information can go to disseminate that information in a country like the U.S., says Kay, as opposed to in a place like Iran or Syria.
Author Extra: Jonathan Kay Answers Your Questions
Jonathan Kay stayed after the show to answer a few more questions.
Q: I so appreciate Jonathan Kay for highlighting this phenomenon, and Diane for hosting him. I've been aware of this trend for several years and know some people involved (and they perfectly fit the general profile Jonathan described). I'm wondering, does Jonathan see any potential for this trend eventually leading to violence - either by individuals or in uprisings? Also, is Jonathan aware of the book Behold a Pale Horse which seems to be seminal for many conspiracy theorists?
- From Blondie via Email
A: The conspiracy theorists I interviewed generally were not violent in any way – and did not even pose any threat of violence that I could see. Most were bookish internet addicts, not gun-toting types (though, of course, there are always exceptions). 9/11 conspiracy theorists, in particular, emphasize the need to pursue the “truth” through activism, litigation, public education and other peaceful methods. At 9/11 Truth events, the leaders take great care to ensure that demonstrators do not get out of hand. And when they hold protests in public places, they obey the instructions of police. I am aware of the book Behind a Pale Horse, and allude to it briefly in my own book – but the influence of that book, and those like it, generally were/are confined to militant survivalist/militia types in the Midwest. And these movements were mostly infiltrated and broken up in the last 15 years, as part of the fallout to the Oklahoma City bombing.
Q: I was wondering if Mr. Kay has anything to say regarding gender as it relates to conspiracy theorists, i.e., are most of these folks men rather than women, or are there any notable differences as to which conspiracy theories men and women are attracted to, etc.?
- From a listener via Email
A: Good question. And I will respond with a quote from my book: “[The science-fiction aspect of many conspiracy theories] is one of the reasons why conspiracist movements tend to be so overwhelmingly male in their core membership. (Another is that the male mind tends to become more easily obsessed with abstract logic puzzles and eccentric ideological systems that are disconnected from the reality of day-to-day human existence—a subject to which I shall return in Chapter 5). For all their pretensions to sophisticated truth-seeking, conspiracists often seem stuck in the suburban-basement universe of secret decoder rings and Star Wars action figures. As Popular Mechanics editor James Meigs put it, many conspiracists have seen “too many movies”—particularly in the action genre. Like James Bond, freshly equipped at the beginning of each film with the latest gadgets from MI6’s weapons lab, the government agents of conspiracists’ imaginations have access to every sort of weapon ever invented—as well as many that are still imaginary. They possess Bond’s skill and savvy, as well. How else could they constantly avoid detection and capture?”
Q: Greatest overlooked conspiracies in this conversation: "Lobbyist." Don't all lobbyist conspire?
- From Jay via Facebook
A: Yes, they do. But they are all conspiring in different directions. And this is how a democracy should work — thousands of different actors, all seeking their own advantage, co-operating with one another where they have common interest; but also opposing one another where they do not have common interests. This is how things are supposed to work in an open society more generally — and I am speaking here not just about lobbyists, but also the media, NGOs, different levels of government and voters themselves. Massive ongoing, undiscovered conspiracies are only possible in nations where information and power are tightly controlled (such as modern-day North Korea). But that does not describe the United States.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
I and my associates are in no way covert or underground. I cannot prove conclusively that the Bush Administration and US intelligence agencies enabled the massacres on 9/11 but the more evidence I examine the more the preponderance of evidence suggests that hijackers were intelligence assets employed to initiate a larger conspiracy for the purpose of mobilizing American citizens for perpetual war and undermining Constitutionally guaranteed rights for better social control and as part of a general move toward economic feudalism. The Meltdown fraud and the recent flash crash along with T(for terror) -party fascism suggest the comprehensive plan remains in motion.
By suggesting that our critique and our resistance are "underground" Jonathan Kay is following a recipe to mobilize bias and marginalize critics before the evidence has a fair and full hearing. Considering the murderous and destructive power our government possesses to focus upon small groups and individuals in protection of the Oligarchy and their trans-global corporations there is almost no use to attempt to operate as an underground, a secret society or even a fringe grouping. Look at the bald-faced resistance in the Middle East: Nonviolence in the face of state terrorism. We share that same situation here. Many reputable persons have published well stated books and articles, commented on videos and signed statements. We are not conspiracy theorists because we are dealing with real questions improperly answered and real issues of ongoing human and national survival. The literature and the mass of criticism is growing and we will not quit without plausible disclosures and retributions. A government by plutonomy lacks any legitimacy, and that is our core issue.
firstly it's still 5/11 on the west coast, that's a fact! that'is hard to swallow.
Was Planet Pluto really above Dallas TX on Kennedy's D.O.B. and Amphedemines in his Krushef -blood? swim=pride-wwii-hero
"Devastation" is not a joke, even if we have mEDicated smirks or untreated pay-back for the fathers{&mothers} non-crimes [geo-cultural-history!!!].
To conspire... is something WE MUST DO, or someone else or something/where else and elsewhere in the mirror of geo-history WILL DO/happen... Cromwell, Shakspear and (Gung Ho)St Francis inn the Far East DID HAPPEN, and how we Balance -reality, is Theoretically Imperative but polarizing in the truest sence. If we follow the Bright Star as the 3 Wise men DID, can we still talk about it? we must indeed, but why? how when where WHO? and of utmost IMPORTance "what".
Pearl Harbor is Wonderful, the moon not so much, and 9-11 is too soon/narrow.
Is the Terorrist\Tourist equation just a GW conspiracy [schitzo-Free-nic?] or do theories just make US nausius?
An important observation, in the words of Bertrand Russel:
"Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones."
It's painfully obvious how true this is in culture.
Jonathan Kay is speaking a lot of sense on the complex subject.
How we look at things determine what we see. A grounding in science, and peer review can go a long way to cutting the bull.
Conspiracies do tend to work best in the dark...
The moon landing was a devastating event? Was there a civilization of teeny tiny Mooninites that the LEM landed on?
The reason for the rise in conspiracy theories is the fact that Americans are loosing their reputation for being honest and upfront with the truth. Recently, there are more and more stories about deception in government, business and the justice system, which just adds full to the fire. Then you have talk show hosts who constantly pour gasoline on the pyre. I agree with your guest that there are groups of people throughout history who cannot accept the fact that America, like all countries, is in a constant state of change hence they cannot deal with the truth but I think the inability to accept truth is a form of mental illness. Conspiracy theoriests make me tired all over. As someone once said, "Sometimes a dog is just a dog."
From someone who grew up in the U.S., I look back to the lies that I was taught about the U.S. history from our own public school system !
Our government is far from squeaky clean...after all, they're the ones who purposefully experimented with injecting Syphilis into the black race back in the 50s
How would they Not expect conspiracy theories?
Ha
Your guest just described conspiracy theorist individuals who fit their beliefs around their "ideological scripts" So would your guest put Bush administration officials who fixed intelligence around their agenda in regard to Iraq in that "conspiracy theorist" category? I would
I think the most destructive conspiracy theory in decades was the Bush administration well constructed "pack of lies" about WMD's in Iraq.
Definition of "conspiracy"
1. a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal or harmful act, esp with political motivation; plot
After the Bush administration fooled us into believing that there were nuclear weapons in Iraq and the mainstream media failed to properly question their assertions, who can blame people for distrusting our traditional pillars of authority?
definition of conspiracy 1. a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal or harmful act, esp with political motivation; plot
General Zinni, Zbigniew Brezinski, Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, retired Lt Col Karen Kwiatowski and many others often referenced a group of individuals who created and dessiminated false WMD intelligence as a "cabal" Are they all conspiracy theorist? Or are the individuals who created the false WMD Intelligence around their what John refers to as an "ideological script" the conspiracy theorist?
Our government has certainly given us an horde (or hoard) of reasons not to trust it---I was alive if not conscious when the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was passed---but that was one lie that only had to hold up for a couple of years to work.
One of the pitfalls of fear and loathing a person or entity is that they [sic] or it starts seems to gain superhuman abilities---I've seen this repeatedly in other people's divorces. These include: absolute evil, absolute competence in action, absolute ability to maintain secrecy. I can only give the Government credit for about one of the three at any given moment, and never all at once.
Add a good scientist's interest in parsimony, and much of what appears to be solid melts into air.
And, finally, this is not innocuous: every erg expended in pursuit of these phantoms is an erg not spent examining all the real bad things the Bush gang did in the wake of the attacks...we've all heard a lot from the Truthers, but how much have you heard about the administration's desperate pressure on intelligence personnel in the days after the attack to pin the blame firmly on Iran or Iraq? If one quarter the energy spent Truthing had been spent on the Kerry campaign in Ohio, the world's assessment of our image might have been more salvageable, with implications for demand for our goods, the value of our currency, and our ability to do actual good when the need arises.
The Nazis (oops, tripped the Godwin circuit-breakers) were probably not responsible for the Reichstag fire...they didn't need to be to exploit the hell out of it.
Tolkien said something to the effect that only wardens are against escapism, but another source responded that those with real, well-thought-out, escape plans don't like people with fantastic ones that do no good....
(And yes, there were Mooninites...and they were all giving us the finger and trying to get our feeble-minded to behave badly, so good riddance.)
The author speaks with a great deal of certainty about what the truth is. How can he know? Labeling as "truthers" or "crazy" those people who have unanswered questions about unexplained events (for example, the unexplained collapse of Building 7 on 9/11, the unprecedented free-fall collapse of the Twin Towers) does nothing to advance knowledge, but only further marginalizes those who ask critical questions. As the author acknowledges, a "germ of truth" is contained in many of these theories, particularly as concerns the selling of wars to the general public.
Does your guest think that the increase in "conspiracy theorist" is connected to the the failure of the majority of the mainstream media to really dig into the Bush administrations conspiracy theory claims about WMD's in Iraq? Or the New York Times willingness to print Judy Millers proven inaccurate stories about WMD's in Iraq?
And would he refer to the Bush administration officials fixing of intelligence around "ideological scripts" a "conspiracy theory"
I think this increase in conspiracy theories is due to real reasons for not trusting government officials and the US mainstream media.
please ask your guest about the Gulf of Tonkin as an event in the Vietnam conflict. I have heard a speaker who was the sonar operator on the supplying destroyer for that incident and part of the Samuel Morse (name of his ship) job was to supply any destroyer in the 4 destroyer group when any ordinance had been fired. This speaker is a friend and acquaintance who I believe as his credibility has never been questioned. He states the crew of the ship who he supplied notes that no one on that ship ever confirmed they were fired upon. Is he a conspiracy theorist? Am I if I believe him? My limited research has never been able to discredit his story.
Thank you
Lew from Wichita Kansas
I find your guest's reference to "grains of truth" to be annoying. Well-read citizens know
that great power is exerted behind the scenes and that a large percentage of Americans
are profoundly ignorant to national and cultural events. Consider "Confessions of an
Economic Hitman" and the intense desire of the PNAC (Cheney, Rumsfeld et. al.) to
invade Iraq in the '90's. These are boulders of truth glimpsed by the American
Bewildered Herd.
Wonder if Jonathon interviewed those in the Bush administration who fixed false intelligence around what he calls an "ideolofical script"?
If not why not?
Wonder if Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Feith were all going through mid life crisis? Their WMD conspiracy theory was the most destructive conspiracy theory in decades
I so appreciate Jonathan Kay for highlighting this phenomenon, and Diane for hosting him. I've been aware of this trend for several years and know some people involved. I'm wondering, does Jonathan see any potential for this trend eventually leading to violence -- either by individuals or in uprisings? Also, is Jonathan aware of the book Behold a Pale Horse which seems to be seminal for many of these people?
Distrust of mainstream media took a nosedive when Walter Cronkite retired! Its nosedive only continued when respected newspapers printed stories by "reporters" that were either made up or plagiarized. Add on top of that cable news networks and other news media jumping on stories before they have been vetted (e.g., the black woman that worked for the US Dept. of Agriculture & the video purporting to show her having racist thoughts toward whites while determining whom to assist & whom to turn down) and turn out to be something different that first reported, and one ends up with a great distrust of mainstream media instead of just adopting a healthy dose of skepticism.
I am a college student in Ohio, I took a propaganda class last fall where we learned about a lot of the military events you are speaking of today, including the viewing of the two documentary's, The Power of Nightmares and Century of the Self. I found the information we learned very convincing and powerful. My question is how can you be so sure there is nothing to these claims? and do you have evidence to the contrary or is the idea of some of these conspiracies being true just too much to believe? I found that by accepting these ideas as true it would take a complete reorganizing on the way we live life.
Darcy
Ohio
This guy is balling all conspiracies in to one glob. Follow the money! 9/11 had so many holes in the official story and the result was the transfer of the treasury to the military industrial complex. Easy to write off 9/11 truth as fringe mentality except for the long list of respected scientists that cannot except that they should "not worry about it - we are taking care of things - up is really down". There is so much disinformation put out there to lead us astray and make us look like fools. Listen to the x-governor and x-Navy seals Jesse Ventura. He is no fool. I watched building 7 fall - for no reason other than - what? There were demolition charges in that building.
Diane, I take exception to your characterization of 9/11 Truthers as "otherwise rational".
I am a scientist with an extensive background and experience in Physics and Engineering. I am nothing if not rational.
I DID THE MATH! There is no way, scientifically, that the fall of the THREE WTC towers were brought down by the planes that struck them. The 9/11 Commission's explanation of these events violates both the First and the Second Laws of Thermodynamics.
Get with it. Science KNOWS! Your guest is an ignoramus.
Bob
Boca Raton
I wonder if Mr. Kay allows for the existence of "tacit" conspiracies. I believe ultra-wealthy international financiers are responsible for most of what ails society today. I don't believe however, that they all gather together in secret smoky rooms and plot out grand conspiracies. Instead, I believe they operate like a "good ol' boy" network. I think they all have a general understanding of what kind of behavior will further their goals of amassing ever greater personal wealth, and so act in concert without ever actually discussing a specific strategy.
I'm quite disturbed that this man blatantly ignores the concept of compartmentalization of information. He says that "people just can't keep secrets" as a blanket dismissal against all conspiracies, and then says that JFK might have been a conspiracy after all and we can never know. The manhattan project used compartmentalization very effectively to keep a monstrously huge project, the nuclear bomb, a secret with thousands of participating individuals.
The denial of climate change has a foundation in the belief in a global conspiracy by scientists around the world to support the idea of human-caused global warming. This may be one of the most dangerous examples of seeing a consensus agreement by experts as a conspiracy. A basic distrust of experts and the establishment is essential here. But surely people who deny climate change have some other motivation--like a fear that they are being asked to change their lifestyles in ways they cannot accept.
I agree with his assertion that people are generally not good at keeping big secrets. I don't recall him applying them to specific theories.
@gonzo411: I don't see why he wouldn't.
Please ask your guest about The Web of Conspiracy, a book that proposed that Stanton was behind Lincoln's assassination--I read this many years ago. The author had included an episode of Robert Lincoln burning many of his father's papers while saying that they showed treason on the part of someone in his father's cabinet.
It only takes one person to confirm a conspiracy with irrefutable proof, and that one person never seems to come forward. This is why I don't believe any of them.
I would love to get a comment about E. Howard Hunts deathbed confession on the JFK Assassination.
Jonathon you are so full of it. Saying that the American people have many places to go to dig through government officials claims. Before the invasion of Iraq if the American public did not listen to Democracy Now,the Diane Rehm show Talk of the Nation and a few internet sites at that point an individual could turn on the MSM MSNBC, CNN, etc etc and hear the same WMD's in Iraq conspiracy theory over and over and over again. You had to be a media junkie to get to bottom of the false WMD intelligence being stovepiped through most of the MSM. Most Americans do not have the time or desire to dig for accurate information based on substantiated claims.
The Bush administration's WMD conspiracy theories promoted by the majority of the MSM is the reason for the growth of "conspiracy theorist" and "conspiracy theories"
When government officials promote conspiracy theories, when the MSM promotes those same government conspiracy theories what the hell do you expect?
Have you considered that the right wing conspiracy theorists are in some part driven by the fact that several left wing conspiracies have been uncovered?
When Sarah Palin was nominated, the media immediately and unformly pounced upon her. The public was deceived into thinking that the media was impartially determining that she was unqualified.
But then months later, the JournoList list service was uncovered and people began to realize that a cabal of left-wing journalists coordinated their attacks on her, not because of her lack of qualifications, but because of their ideology and their desire to see her fail.
Compsiricies should not be dismissed out of hand. But, of course any extraordinary claims should require extraordinary proof.
A team of independent scientists and engineers (the real ones, not those with 'backgrounds') debunked all the 9/11 conspiracies years ago in a Popular Mechanics magazine investigation. It happened the way it happened. The planes crashed , the buildings collapsed. GET OVER IT.