Saturday, January 5, 2013

The Business of Deception

As a history teacher, if there is one group of people that annoy me the most…well, annoy might be a strong word…it is conspiracy theorists.  I take my profession seriously and as a historian, I feel a certain obligation to be as accurate and objective as it is possible for me to be.  For most subjects, there is plenty to read and to turn to in order to obtain a better understanding of history.  For a handful of other subjects, the dearth of primary sources is an obstacle to painting a complete picture.  While trained and respectable historians see a scarcity of evidence as a responsibility to speculate with measure, others see it as a chance to build themselves up and muddy the waters.  Entering from stage left are the conspiracy theorists. 

That is not to say that conspiracy theorists cannot be entertaining – a convoluted megillah filled with menacing foreign spies, dull-witted and easily duped/manipulated American agents, unsuspecting and innocent civilian casualties, people who hang in shadows and others who work in plain sight.  What makes conspiracy theories so enticing is that they are so titillating and ultimately, a great deal more interesting than the truth.  In a society that is increasingly addicted to entertainment, we see the truth as mundane and look to the salacious or unsustainable as more “interesting.”  While, as Occam’s Razor suggests, the simplest answer is usually correct, people have made a great deal out of peddling the historical “smut.”   

Some of the most common characteristics of conspiracy theorists begin with disconnected lines of thought, put together has if they are connected.  One of the most famous examples of this is the highly entertaining and masterfully done JFK, Oliver Stone’s jumble of theories as to the cause of John F. Kennedy’s assassination.  The blending of real and fabricated black and white scenes was designed to fuse reality and fiction for the viewer.  The result?  I had a bunch of high school students who swore they now knew who was responsible for President Kennedy’s death.   

There is also a use of “facts” – a plethora of “facts” – that are designed to show an incontrovertible mastery of the situation.  People will usually believe those who are confident in their message, regardless of its validity.  Conspiracy theorists are also known for the citing of a myriad of sources, yet few of them are legitimate journalists or historians.  Most of them are fringe personalities that are just as radical and misguided as those who quote them.  Again, with each of these characteristics, they are hoping that the show of knowledge and expertise will convince when a close inspection of their information would not hold.  There is also a certain amount of narcissism – only they have the real truth.  It is part of the neurosis that pushes them to try and sell the lie.   

Likely the biggest, most recent examples of the conspiracy tendency are the Kennedy assassination and the attacks of September 11.  With most conspiracy theorists, there is a conflicting foundation for most of their arguments – one, the government is hypervigilant and capable of maintaining secrets and organizing deception at multifarious and duplicitous levels to keep their actions hidden but two, there is a plethora of evidence to suggest the dark deeds and collusion of the government.  The two seldom go hand in hand but these two assumptions are at the heart of conspiracy theorists. 

As a historian, I understand that sometimes, the truth will never be known and I must be ok with that idea.  However, as long as people struggle with the unknown, conspiracy theorists will thrive and prosper.  Instead, I try to teach my students the value of research and the assessment of a legitimate and not so legitimate sources.  There is a process, a time-honored one, that historians and students of history have followed to discover the past.  The absence of information is not a license to make up evidence.  Our job is to find the truth, not to ensure we will like the truth.  Historical truth is defined by what can be proven.  I also tell my students to beware of false prophets – the conspiracy theorists.  Some of these folks do not know better and others have agendas but all represent a threat to our national story and legacy. 

No comments:

Post a Comment