opinion@dailylobo.com
Sometimes, left-wing ideology can be just as inflexible as right-wing ideology. That’s the important lesson I learned from my previous column about the Bilderberg Group. I find it tragic that so many people who claim to be politically progressive seem to lose all critical thinking abilities when the words “conspiracy theory” enter the conversation.
Call me crazy, but I believe that a truly progressive, open-minded person would take the time to investigate controversial subjects on their own rather than simply parroting the sanitized, mainstream version of what constitutes a “conspiracy theory” and what does not. With some folks, the instant you utter those terrible words their brains explode and they automatically assume you’re some kind of lunatic for even bringing it up. It’s a knee-jerk reaction. No amount of evidence will convince them otherwise.
That doesn’t sound like a very progressive approach to me. That seems pretty dogmatic. How can somebody have a valid opinion on a subject they know nothing about?
Predictably, in the aftermath of the Boston Marathon tragedy, talk of conspiracy theories and government “false-flag” operations has proliferated in the media. Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, a cognitive scientist at the University of Western Australia, recently published a paper in the scholarly journal Psychological Science titled, “NASA faked the moon landing — Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science.”
The paper has received acclaim for its examination of the psychology behind conspiracy theories which reject science, particularly among the so-called “climate change deniers.”
Lewandowsky’s theory is that people who embrace conspiracies need to have what he calls a “mechanism against dread.”
Psychologically, it’s different from evidence-based thinking: It gives people a sense of control. “A conspiracy theory is immune to evidence, and that can pretty well serve as the definition of one,” he recently told Salon. “If you reject evidence, or reinterpret the evidence to be confirmation of your theory, or you ignore mountains of evidence to focus on just one thing, you’re probably a conspiracy theorist. We call that a self-sealing nature of reasoning.”
Just for the record, I do not believe that NASA faked the moon landings. I watched every one of them live on television. However, I know for a fact that conspiracies do indeed exist. I don’t need to look any further than the US criminal justice system for the answer: When more than one person is charged with homicide, what do they call it? Conspiracy to commit murder! There you go. Does that mean I’m crazy for believing there was a conspiracy in the Boston Marathon bombing? More than one person was involved, after all.
I think we need to clarify our terms here.
Liberals and conservatives alike disparage conspiracy theorists for being unhinged or even dangerous outliers — when it serves their purposes. The debate over climate change is a perfect example. So is what happened in Boston.
Unfortunately, many intelligent people rush to make judgments based on their emotions, even though they believe they’re thinking critically. Few of them actually do the research on any of those “wacky” conspiracy theories for themselves. Either they don’t care enough to bother, or they have a mental block without realizing that they already believe in plenty of conspiracies.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
That’s hypocrisy.
I’ve done sufficient research to understand that when it comes to truth and accuracy, no government on earth is trustworthy; certainly not the United States. Without exception, every government lies to its own citizens at some point. Am I some kind of conspiracy theorist for believing that? Documented proof isn’t enough for some people, I guess. Surely, everyone’s heard of WikiLeaks by now. Does anybody remember Watergate, Iran-Contra, or the Pentagon Papers?
The late George Carlin once said, “The term ‘conspiracy theorist’ is a label used by the establishment to dismiss the idea that powerful people might get together and actually plan anything…”
It’s time to dispense with all this empty rhetoric about “thinking outside the box” and actually start doing it. We can begin by using our critical thinking skills, instead of just taking someone else’s word for “what really happened.” Let’s go beyond thinking outside the box: Let’s try to envision thinking outside the room the box is in.
Embracing alternative opinions is a good place to start. As Alexandra Swanberg wrote in her Daily Lobo opinion column last week, “See what’s out there, and make up your own mind about what you believe.” I couldn’t agree more.
We’ll never be able to bring about any sort of real change if we can’t even recognize what is right before our eyes. Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives; they really are two sides of the same coin. The true rulers of our planet are openly mocking us as we muddle around, pointing fingers at each other.
