Dangerous Machinery: “Conspiracy Theorist” as a Transpersonal Strategy of Exclusion

Abstract

In a culture of fear, we should expect the rise of new mechanisms of social control to deflect distrust, anxiety, and threat. Relying on the analysis of popular and academic texts, we examine one such mechanism, the label conspiracy theory, and explore how it works in public discourse to “go meta” by sidestepping the examination of evidence. Our findings suggest that authors use the conspiracy theorist label as (1) a routinized strategy of exclusion; (2) a reframing mechanism that deflects questions or concerns about power, corruption, and motive; and (3) an attack upon the personhood and competence of the questioner. This label becomes dangerous machinery at the transpersonal levels of media and academic discourse, symbolically stripping the claimant of the status of reasonable interlocutor—often to avoid the need to account for one's own action or speech. We argue that this and similar mechanisms simultaneously control the flow of information and symbolically demobilize certain voices and issues in public discourse.

Online communication as a window to conspiracist worldviews

“…Evidently, despite endorsing conspiracist explanations, and being sufficiently committed to them to argue about them extensively, people appeared to be motivated to avoid the social stigma associated with the label. In objecting to the label, many commenters characterized it as an intellectual slur used to marginalize dissent and pathologize reasonable suspicion, which is in line with recent scholarly characterizations by Bratich (2002, 2008), deHaven-Smith (2013), and Husting and Orr (2007). Recent research has borne out the intuitive idea that such a stigma exists, demonstrating that people tend to view conspiracists as gullible, naive, crazy, and dishonest (Klein et al, 2015).…”

Measuring Belief in Conspiracy Theories: Validation of a French and English Single-Item Scale

“…More specifically, our instructions give examples of political and social events (e.g., the assassination of President John F. Kennedy) that have been the source of numerous conspiracy theories. As in other research, we deliberately chose not to mention the word "conspiracy theory" (Douglas & Sutton, 2008;Wood & Douglas, 2013), knowing that the term may be negatively connoted (Husting & Orr, 2007). The item specifically asked to what extent people think the authorities frequently hide the truth regarding the real origin of some events.…”

Understanding Conspiracy Online: Social Media and the Spread of Suspicious Thinking

“…Husting and Orr (2007) offer a quite detailed argument against the term, arguing that it is "a reframing device that neutralizes questions about power and motive while turning the force of challenges back on their speakers" (Husting & Orr, 2007, p. 146). Calling someone a conspiracy theorist is a way of de-legitimizing their position on an issue, and frequently requires an individual to come to their own defense (Husting & Orr, 2007). As such, a more neutral term might be useful for discussing these topics, especially since feelings of social exclusion have been shown to increase conspiratorial thinking.…”