Rob Nikolewski
In the wake of the killing of Osama bin Laden, a spate of stories have appeared citing people who doubt whether the mastermind of 9/11 is really dead.
But the doubters don’t just include bin Laden’s defenders in the Middle East.
In a story published by the Santa Fe edition of the Albuquerque Journal (sorry, you need a subscription to read the entire article), a reporter dropped by a social studies class at Santa Fe High School and discovered that seven of the 13 students there “say they think President Obama is hoodwinking the country with the tale of Osama bin Laden’s death in Pakistan.”
Seven of out 13. Welcome to Oliver Stone’s America, where millions almost reflexively assume a conspiracy theory is afoot — whether they’re leftwing, rightwing or have no wings at all.
I can’t say I was surprised because just a couple days earlier while at the neighborhood dog park, the conversation quickly turned to the bin Laden killing. “I don’t believe it for a minute,” the owner of a rust-colored retriever said with certainty to a group of about five of us.
This was a college-educated woman. And the people around her — who could have been the parents of the kids in the Journal article — listened respectfully.
I walked away. I have learned it’s best to simply leave in such situations. My colleagues and I often discuss how, upon telling people we cover politics, we often end up subjected to a monologue from people who never entertain a single doubt about their convictions.
You can argue or joust with anyone — conservative or liberal — who has enough emotional distance to see the inevitable contradictions or intellecual weaknesses of their side’s conventional positions. But you can’t argue with somebody who is convinced of their own intellectual purity.
That goes double for believers in conspiracy theories.
No facts are good enough, no logic stringent enough and no explanation sufficient enough to convince them that their pet theory is cracked.
For some on the far right, it’s the “birther” thing with President Obama. In the previous administration, a number of lefties spoke in serious tones about George W. and Dick Cheney (of course) contocting the collapse of the Twin Towers. And of course, there’s the grandaddy of all consipiracy theories — the JFK assasination.
It’s Alex Jones’ world, folks, we’re just living in it.
One of the interesting things about the subscribers of conspiracy theories: Logically, you’d think that if you could irrefutably prove the conspiracy theory false, the holder of said theory would be relieved.
After all, if the military-industrial complex was not in cahoots with the Mafia, Lyndon Johnson, Fidel Castro and Justin Beiber to bump off Jack Kennedy, then there are fewer reasons for mistrusting life in general and the government in particular. You would think they would happy to have this burden lifted.
But the conspiracy believer only reacts with greater anger upon hearing contrary evidence, no matter how convincing it is.
Obviously, there’s something else going on there.
It’s odd. We are now more technologically advanced than ever. We can’t tear ourselves away from our computers when we’re at work, from our cellphones in our cars, from surfing the ‘Net in our homes, etc. Yet, at the same time, it seems a larger number of people have become unmoored by the science and reason that make our modern world possible.
In the 18th century, our Founding Fathers were devoted to the promotion of Reason with a capital “R.” In the 19th century, America quickly became an industrial giant, inventing and embracing its own distinct ethos — called “Yankee ingenuity” — constructed on scientific building blocks. Mark Twain embodied this spirit in pitch-perfect tones in 1889 when he wrote “A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court.”
By the time the next 100 years were done, it was no coincidence that the 20th century was rightly called “The American Century.”
But now in the early part of the 21st century, it seems rigorous thinking is breaking down.
Of course, there have always been crackpots but I find it interesting that in popular culture — which reflects society much more than it shapes it — so many of the movies, books and (nowadays) videogames feature young protagonists living in a world of ruled by magic and fantasy rather than in one governed by physical laws and logic.
Kids used to read “Encyclopedia Brown” or the Hardy Boys or Nancy Drew, who acted as junior versions of Sherlock Holmes, outwitting bad guys and bullies with reason and self-reliance. Now it’s Harry Potter.
As grownups, we often set the tone by eschewing that trite old idea of a greater truth.
When Oliver Stone was rightly criticized for the factual inaccuracies and distortions in his movie JFK he waved off his critics by saying his film offered a “countermyth” with a higher purpose than mere consistency of facts.
Sure, one can argue about what and who determines truth but this greater miasma that conspiratorial nonsense envelops us in comes at a price. If there is no truth we can agree on, then any truth can take its place — especially one that makes us comfortable in our own prejudices.
For sure, the pillars of society have done their fair share to forfeit their trust after numerous examples of abuse and/or incompetence by the government, the church or our learning institutions.
But there is a difference between being skeptical and being cynical.
We should always cast a critical eye on the things that matter. And I mean “critical” in the sense the dictionary defines it: involving skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.
From there, we can determine through rational, rigorous thought a sense of what’s right and wrong; of what’s real and unreal; and what’s credible and what’s a mere intellectual shortcut to reassure a preconceived notion.
And if you don’t agree with me, you’re simply part of the plot.
