Conspiracy Theory

[CGowen]

The first recorded use of the phrase "conspiracy theory" dates back to an economics article in the 1920s.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/6213226.stm

[naboo]

1. Ha, it's funny because the article

points out that the corporate media/neocon version of events falls in line with the earlier concept of "conspiracy theory" - pointing to a a minority group or "other" to blame for events and create fear and cause people to come together against them. Which is exactly what the version we're being sold is -a conspiracy theory.

[CGowen]

2. you're right, Atta, cave, Bin Laden, dirty bombs and so on

Conspiracy theories have served different political and cultural functions during the last two centuries.

Often minority groups or outsiders are blamed for social woes, in a familiar process of scapegoating that helps to provide a comforting sense of coherence and community to those who believe their way of life is imperilled by conspiring forces.

Moreover, these popular fears are exploited by those in positions of power in order to further their own vested interests.

[JackRiddler]

3. YEE-ARRGH... Anyone have access to the OED online?

I've wasted much precious time looking for more about the origins of the phrase. What you quote is the entirety of what BBC has to say about it on their site. What economics article? It's naught but a trivial diversion, yet I'm curious how the phrase was used in its original coinage. (Naturally I'm wondering if the conspiracy theory it identifies turned out to be true or false, or remains indeterminate.)

[CGowen]

4. Ah, well BBC ...

I'm sorry, but I was interested myself and thought someone would know more.

It could have something to do with the depression or the wild speculations at Wall Street during the roaring 20's.
Or it could be something marginal.

[JackRiddler]

5. Who knows... think I'll e-mail the BBC author.

I've heard any form of class analysis attacked as conspiratorial. Sometimes all you have to do is imply there are owners of capital and they make decisions about how it is invested to earn the tag. We do, after all, have a classless society!

[JackRiddler]

6. Got it... according to OED

I'm not surprised to find Knight's claim is wrong, according to the Oxford English Dictionary. (Not surprised because most claims turn out to be wrong when researched.)

It defines conspiracy theory and gives the etymological history as follows.

ADDITIONS SERIES 1997


    conspiracy, n. (...)

    Add:    4. Special Combs. conspiracy theory, the theory that an event or phenomenon occurs as a result of a conspiracy between interested parties; spec. a belief that some covert but influential agency (typically political in motivation and oppressive in intent) is responsible for an unexplained event; so conspiracy theorist.

1909 Amer. Hist. Rev. XIV. 836 The claim that Atchison was the originator of the repeal may be termed a recrudescence of the *conspiracy theory first asserted by Colonel John A. Parker of Virginia in 1880. 1952 K. R. POPPER Open Society (ed. 2) II. xiv. 94, I call it the ‘conspiracy theory of society’. It is the view that an explanation of a social phenomenon consists in the discovery of the men or groups who are interested in the occurrence of this phenomenon. 1964 Listener 24 Sept. 471/3 His ‘vulgar economic realities’ are the cloak for a conspiracy-theory, and he is disappointed that I don't subscribe to it. 1964 New Statesman 1 May 694/2 *Conspiracy theorists will be disappointed by the absence of a dogmatic introduction. 1975 N.Y. Times 12 May 10/4 Conspiracy theorists contend that two of the men have strong resemblances to E. Howard Hunt Jr. and Frank A. Sturgis, convicted in the Watergate break-in. 1987 W. GREIDER Secrets of Temple I. ii. 52 From the beginning, the Federal Reserve was implicated in nativist conspiracy theories. 1990 Times Educ. Suppl. 7 Dec. 5/1 Conspiracy theorists see the invisible hand of the Department of Education and Science behind the emergence of Walter Ulrich as secretary of the National Association of Governors and Managers.

---

Apparently this has to do with the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854, effectively repealing the Missouri compromise (banning slavery north of the 30th parallel, if I remember correctly). Sen. Atchison of Missouri was one of the supporters of the bill.

QUOTE:

Historians have long argued over Douglas's motives in introducing this measure, which seemed indirectly to repeal the Missouri Compromise ban on slavery in the Nebraska region and thus reopened the sectional conflict. Some critics have maintained that Douglas bad a material interest in the promotion of slavery, since his first wife bad inherited a plantation with 150 slaves. More frequently it has been argued that Douglas was angling for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1856 and hoped to win Southern support. Refuting these charges, friendly historians have suggested instead that Douglas wished to assist Senator David R. Atchison in his campaign for re-election in Missouri, that be desired to promote the building of a transcontinental railroad with eastern termini at Chicago and St. Louis, or that he hoped to give the floundering Democratic party a fresh issue upon which it could appeal to the voters.-, Recently the argument has been settled by the discovery of a contemporary letter in which Douglas himself explained his motives. His purpose in introducing the Kansas-Nebraska bill, Douglas declared, was to remove the "barbarian wall" of Indian tribes checking further settlement in the central plains and "to authorize and encourage a continuous line of settlements to the Pacific Ocean." His central idea of continental expansion included railroad development. As he explained:

continued http://www.civilwarhome.com/kansasnebraska.htm

Anyway, I'm happy I learned that much today but I don't have more time for brushing up on Sen. Atchison and the end of the Missouri Compromise. For now it appears that the first usage of the term in the OED is typically misleading - observations on the normal machinations of power and the normal screwing of the poor (in this case slaves) are mystified by their detractors as "conspiracy theory."


http://books.google.com/books?id=Wwu3aHwM33MC&pg=RA2-PA220&lpg=RA2-PA220&dq=atchison+repeal+missouri+compromise+1854&source=web&ots=QPbgZ83CFI&sig=E4ZmAeXGikRAzvz4AHZmwD2KGgw

See bottom here:
http://www.jstor.org/view/00028762/di951115/95p00975/0

[The Lone Groover]

7. "observations on the normal machinations of power and the normal screwing of the poor"

This doesn't get discussed much... but it is the most obvious fact out there.

The uber-rich and powerful conspire behind closed doors on ways to stay rich and powerful. It involves at least hundreds of people and in the main it is kept secret.

What the fuck is Bilderberg. Does anyone know?

Anyone who thinks they leave it to chance is nuts.

But what happens is anyone who thinks and talks about it gets labeled a conspiracy theorist.

There is no theory about this - it is an obvious fact - the rich and powerful conspire to screw the poor. The uber-rich and powerful conspire to screw everybody.

[CGowen]

8. If you type

"bilderberg exposed" into video google you can see a documentary about the last conference (I haven't seen it)

Then there is this guy, who wrote a book and made a movie
http://books.guardian.co.uk/extracts/story/0,,449284,00.html

"Margaret Thatcher is one of the good guys," said Jim. "Bilderberg ordered her to dismantle British sovereignty, but she said no way, so they had her sacked."

Big Jim said he once found himself at a drinks party with Thatcher and he took the opportunity to sidle up to her. "How does it feel to have been denounced by those Bilderberg boys, ma'am?" he growled. She whispered back that she considered it a "great tribute to be denounced by Bilderberg"

David Rockefellar(on page 405, Chapter 27, entitled, "Proud Internationalist"):

For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.

There are people who visited it and were inside a conference and reject it's ideas. It's up to you if you want to believe it.

"This is more than a war against terrorism. This is a war against the citizens of all countries. The current elites are creating so much fear that people don't know how to respond. But they must remember. This is a move to implement a world dictatorship within the next five years."
- Dr. Johannes Koeppl, a former German Defense Ministry official and NATO advisor

Or recently you have Putin talking about similar problems

The unipolar world that had been proposed after the Cold War did not take place either.

The history of humanity certainly has gone through unipolar periods and seen aspirations to world supremacy. And what hasn’t happened in world history?

....However, what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term, at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making.

It is world in which there is one master, one sovereign. And at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system, but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within.

And this certainly has nothing in common with democracy. Because, as you know, democracy is the power of the majority in light of the interests and opinions of the minority.

Incidentally, Russia – we – are constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves.

I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world. And this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – world, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilisation.
.........

http://www.kremlin.ru/eng/speeches/2007/02/10/0138_type82912type82914type82917type84779_118135.shtml

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JackRiddler]

9. Prof. Knight corrects himself (I wrote to him)

Dear Nicholas,

I've just checked, and in fact the OED (1997 supplement) now cites an
article from American Historical Review from 1909 as the first usage.

Best,

Peter Knight

----------

I like the combo of 1997 and "now cites."

The pleasures of minor gotchas...

[CGowen]

10. Do they use crystal balls at BBC?

He didn't want to disclose his source.........


:rofl:

[JackRiddler]

11. Another response from Prof. Knight...

Dear Nicholas,

I can't quite get my head round the online discussion, but no matter.

Although the OED gives the first cite as 1909, the important entry is the
Karl Popper one -- as far as I can tell this is really when the term
"conspiracy theory" as a way diagnosing and dismissing a particular
understanding of historical causality really becomes sedimented into common
usage. Popper is soon joined by Richard Hofstadter, Bernard Bailyn and
others in the late 1950s, early 1960s. For more on this see Mark Fenster and
my books on conspiracy theories. (When I wrote my PhD, before the 1997 OED
supplement was published, the earliest usage I had found to the phrase was
indeed the 1920s -- hence my mistake. But I've yet to see any evidence that
the phrase was popular before Popper.)

Best,

Peter

----

I'd be on board - if only a distinction were to be made between mega-conspiracy theory (monocausal attributions to some eternal group a la "The Illuminati") and deep politics (the study of hidden agendas, motives and operations by all relevant groups). The latter is both systemically analytical and very important in understanding politics and history.