Is the World Governed by Conspiracy? 

It was a widely held belief that it was safe to disregard most of these individuals. However, with the decline of traditional, accountable journalism and the rise of social media, millions of unsuspecting individuals have become exposed to these theories. This has led to the proliferation of conspiratorial thinking, now represented by politicians in parliament, our neighbors, family members, and, often, succumbing to the spirit of the times, ourselves. How did we arrive at a juncture where conspiracy logic dictates our worldview? Indeed, conspiracy thinking has deeply entrenched itself in our thought processes. The ruthlessness of the capitalist economy and the pervasive nature of politics exacerbate this issue. 

Enter the Era of Hyperpolitics! 

The 1990s marked a general retreat into the sanctuary of private life. This period is also known as the era of post-politics, a time characterized by the transcendence of conflicts and disagreements in favor of a meritocratic consensus among elites. Political parties and politicians were, from then on, expected to operate like businesspeople: heed the advice of experts, maximize voter support, and, ultimately, discard the baggage of discredited ideas. Nobel laureate Annie Ernaux encapsulated that era, highlighting the pervasive sense of resignation and ennui: 

“The term ‘struggle’ lost its value as a remnant of Marxism, now a subject of ridicule; ‘defense of rights’ predominantly referred to consumer rights.”

This allowed citizens to breathe a sigh of relief and concentrate on personal matters: career advancement, family, and any other issues deemed significant; meanwhile, politicians and specially trained economists were to handle everything else. Processes overseen by large corporations were regarded with almost religious awe. Hence, Tony Blair’s assertion at the time, equating opposition to globalization with resisting the changing seasons, raised no eyebrows. In 1992, Francis Fukuyama declared the ‘end of history,’ signifying the triumph of liberal democracy in the marketplace of ideas, leaving no room for alternative political realities. Two decades later, in “The Origins of Political Order,” he refined his analysis, depicting the contemporary evolution of public institutions, particularly in Europe, as a journey towards achieving a ‘Denmark’ standard, a metaphorical reference to a place universally acknowledged to possess commendable political and economic institutions: stability, democracy, peace, prosperity, inclusivity, and remarkably low political corruption.

Regrettably, reality is often unpredictable, hence today’s world bears no resemblance to the calm 1990s and 2000s. The “post-politics” era has irrevocably come to an end. Although the majority of nations undoubtedly still strive to attain the level of Denmark, an integral aspect of the ‘journey to Denmark,’ namely the prospect of implementing progressive taxation for the affluent sectors of society, continues to be an insurmountable hurdle for liberal politicians and their voters.

Instead of witnessing a revival of mass politics—robust trade unions or widespread resistance movements—characteristic of the early 20th century, we are observing the monopolization of public life by politics itself. Nowadays, everything is politicized. However, despite the escalating interest in its workings, only a handful of individuals partake in any organized form of protest. This phenomenon can be interpreted as a shift from post-politics to hyperpolitics—an acute concentration on social manners and moralizing, yet accompanied by an absence of concrete advantages that we, as a community, can collectively realize.

Anton Jäger, in his article “From Post-Politics to Hyper-Politics,” observes that a new form of conspiratorial “politics” has permeated various aspects of life, from soccer fields and Netflix series to social media communications. Hyperpolitics emerges as post-politics wanes, with questions about possession and influence increasingly overshadowed by a medley of identity and morality issues. A segment of conservative public opinion perceives society as engulfed in a never-ending Dreyfus affair, disrupting family gatherings and workplace conversations. Meanwhile, the liberal center yearns for the tranquility of the post-political era, when market forces steered change, and technocracy was the enforced compromise.

This has led to a rising trend of deliberately distancing oneself from politics, perceived as a tainted realm rife with scandals and conspiracies masterminded by unknown elites. The media frenzy has supplanted meaningful dialogue, which, in the realm of conspiracy thinking, is merely a façade for the actual politics pursued by “Davos people,” “European elites,” “Soros,” “LGBTQ+ lobby,” “Freemasons,” big tech representatives, so-called reptilians, or a combination of these invisible forces operating in sinister coalition. In the United States, approximately 12 million people subscribe to the reptilian conspiracy theory; in 2013, this constituted over 4 percent of the population.

The Politics of Suspicion

The phrase “conspiracy theory” was first documented in official records during the aftermath of the 1881 assassination of US President James A. Garfield. However, it became a common term in everyday parlance in the mid-20th century, amidst the escalating tensions following the killing of President John F. Kennedy. Historians contend that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) urged the media to use the term “conspiracy” frequently to undermine those questioning the official report from the U.S. government. 

The conspiratorial way of thinking is an undesirable relic of the Enlightenment and results from humankind’s complete submersion in modernity—a period that dismissed superstition in favor of science and rationality. To fully grasp the phenomenon of conspiracy theories, it is essential to delineate the circumstances and characteristics under which they most commonly surface in public dialogue. In his foundational work for post-war political culture, “The Open Society and Its Enemies” (1945), Karl Popper discusses the “conspiracy theory of society.” He posits that the 19th and 20th centuries were dominated by the notion that momentous events are primarily “the outcome of the deliberate intentions of some influential individuals and groups”; a concept incredibly aligned with the beliefs of conspiracy theory adherents.

Michael Barkun’s widely recognized theory on conspiracy logic posits that this model hinges on three fundamental axioms in perceiving reality: nothing occurs by chance; nothing is as it appears; everything is interconnected. The European Commission, in collaboration with UNESCO, has broadened this definition by incorporating several additional elements. According to a report on conspiracy theories, besides the “malevolent forces with sinister intentions,” these theories usually presuppose the existence of a conspiratorial group, depend on questionable evidence, employ a binary classification of good and evil, and invariably designate a group or entities as scapegoats.

How should politicians react to conspiracy theories? It is certainly preferable if they do not manipulate them for their political advantage, a regrettable practice evident in the recent White House elections. As documented by Cullen Hoback in “Q: Into the Storm,” members of the QAnon group maintained close affiliations with the Trump administration throughout his final term. This perilous interaction between politics and conspiracy theories culminated in the notorious attack on the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021, predominantly executed by zealous adherents of the enigmatic Q. 

Conversely, categorically dismissing supporters of conspiracy theories equates to neglecting the undercurrents of desperation and anger that underpin the discourse of most groups marginalized and ostracized by the mainstream media. It is imperative to avoid pathologizing and mocking that what necessitates a political response.

Capitalism-induced Fever 

Our ability to act with a sense of agency is compromised when the surrounding reality seems so intricate that it is beyond our understanding, whether that is due to technological progress or its global magnitude. These elements heighten our vulnerability to conspiracy theories and the populist battles of cultural differences. Simultaneously, modern capitalism and the media remain unmoved by our clumsy efforts to make sense of the world, intentionally leveraging our rage, resentment, and impotence to augment their profits.

This is the contradiction explored by cultural critic Marcus Gilroy-Ware in “After the Fact? The Truth about Fake News” (2022). He suggests that the conflicting nature of transactions in capitalism is a key contributor to the politics of distrust, as it necessitates the belief among participants that we are all navigating ‘shark-filled waters’; any collective endeavors are instantly viewed with suspicion, and individualism overshadows joint action. Corporations not only deceive but also actively harm consumers, as their paramount interest lies in selling a greater volume of products. Gilroy-Ware delineates a lengthy roster of capitalism’s antagonists: from tobacco companies denying the universally acknowledged health repercussions of smoking to oil companies sponsoring research that questions the human influence on climate change, and Purdue Pharma compensating doctors for prescribing OxyContin, only to audaciously patent a medication to treat the addiction they had previously stoked.

Curbing the Conspiracy Cycle? 

For years, the conspiracy thinking and activities of authorities steeped in conspiracy theories have eroded trust in essential institutions. One proposition has been the establishment of ‘Citizens’ Assemblies’, which have been addressing urgent public concerns—from climate change and parliamentary reforms to aging population challenges—for several years. Participants in these debates are chosen at random, but their decisions must be ratified by the governments. This approach was implemented during the abortion law changes in Ireland, where recommendations prepared by the Citizens’ Assembly led the government to ultimately repeal the abortion ban.

It is imperative to reintroduce politics into the public domain, but it must be done transparently and inclusively, involving citizens in the decision-making process. At present, every significant event is scrutinized through the lens of media politics, predominantly fueled by ideological matters. This way of conducting debates sparks controversy, as opinions are formed from distinctly outlined ideological camps. Unless we alter our approach, we will find ourselves trapped in a self-sustaining cycle of conspiracy theories and the futile politicization of various facets of everyday life.

Read more on Holistic News