{"id":161320,"date":"2023-03-26T10:28:43","date_gmt":"2023-03-26T14:28:43","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=161320"},"modified":"2023-03-26T10:29:28","modified_gmt":"2023-03-26T14:29:28","slug":"dissent-into-madness","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=161320","title":{"rendered":"

Dissent Into Madness<\/h1>"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

Dissent Into Madness: Crazy Conspiracy Theorists<\/h1>\n

by\u00a0James Corbett
\ncorbettreport.com<\/p>\n

In \u201cDissent Into Madness: The Weaponization of Psychiatry<\/a>,\u201d I told the long and sordid history of how the study of the mind has been used to suppress political opposition and subdue unruly segments of the population\u2014not just in the \u201cenemy states\u201d of Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany or communist Cuba, but in England and the US and the rest of the \u201cfree and democratic West\u201d as well. I also looked at specific examples of how this was accomplished and named names of some of the figures who had a hand in forging this psychiatric weapon.<\/p>\n

With that history in mind, this week I will explore how the public has been trained to accept the pathologization of those peskiest of dissenters, the conspiracy realists. I will also explain how the trigger has already been pulled on this psychiatric weapon and how it is impacting those who dare question the motives of our would-be rulers.<\/p>\n

Are you ready? Let\u2019s begin . . .<\/p>\n

Pathologizing Conspiracy<\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

One of the most popular articles to be written in recent decades is titled \u201cWhy Do People Believe in Conspiracies?\u201d<\/p>\n

It starts by noting the worrying rise in the number of people who believe in wild, outlandish theories about how people in positions of power conspire to maintain their influence and expand their wealth.<\/p>\n

The article\u2019s author then cites a psychologist, who explains that well-meaning but emotionally unstable people typically latch on to these fantastical conspiracy theories because they help these poor, deluded souls make sense of the world and offer them a feeling of control over an uncontrollable world.<\/p>\n

Next, the report offers advice to those who are seeking to disabuse anyone who has fallen for this conspiracy claptrap of their delusional notions. That advice, it turns out, is the same admonition given to someone coming upon a wild animal in the jungle: don\u2019t confront the target directly or make them angry; speak to them in soothing tones and pretend to listen to what they\u2019re saying; and disengage if it seems they\u2019re preparing to attack.<\/p>\n

But this article usually ends on a positive note: if this wild conspiracy theorist you\u2019re talking to hasn\u2019t yet lost touch with reality, then it may be possible to talk them down from the ledge. You can gently create some cognitive dissonance in their mind by pointing out that every conspiracy that has ever occurred in history has been exposed by whistleblowers and reported on by journalists, and therefore there is no such thing as a secret conspiracy. If they are of sound mind, this will be enough. Your confused friend will see the light and learn to trust government and authority once again.<\/p>\n

Do you want to read this article? Would you like a link? Well, I don\u2019t have one link for you; I have dozens.<\/p>\n

You see, the curious thing about this \u201cWhy Do People Believe in Conspiracies?\u201d article is that it hasn\u2019t been written just once or twice. It\u2019s been written hundreds of times by hundreds of different journalists, and it\u2019s been published by\u00a0the BBC<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0FiveThirtyEight<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Vox<\/a>\u00a0and the\u00a0American Psychological Association<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0The New York Times<\/a>\u00a0<\/em>and\u00a0PsychCentral<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Addiction Center<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0LSU<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Technology Review<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0National Geographic<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0verywellmind<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Business Insider<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Psychology Today<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Harvard<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0LiveScience<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Scientific<\/a><\/em>\u00a0[sic]\u00a0<\/a>American<\/a><\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0NBC News<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0The Conversation<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Intelligencer<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Time<\/a><\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0The Guardian<\/a><\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Popular Mechanics<\/a><\/em>\u00a0and even that most prestigious of journalistic institutions,\u00a0goop<\/a><\/em>. (Yes,\u00a0goop<\/a><\/em>!)<\/p>\n

And it\u2019s not only in written form. It\u2019s also a video report that\u2019s been filed by\u00a0the CBC<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Channel 4<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0CNBC<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Channel 4<\/a>\u00a0(again) and\u00a0DNews<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0StarTalk<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a060 Minutes<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Time<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0DNews<\/a>\u00a0(again) and\u00a0Big Think<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Al Jazeera<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0the Weekly<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Tech Insider<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Inverse<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Dr. Todd Grande<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0euronews<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0CBS News<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0The University of Chicago<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Oh, and did I mention it\u2019s also a podcast? Well, it is, and it\u2019s been produced by\u00a0Ava Lassiter<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0NPR<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Radio Times<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0NPR<\/a>\u00a0(again) and\u00a0LSE<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Bill Gates<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0NPR<\/a>\u00a0(again again) and\u00a0The Anthill<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Speaking of Psychology<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0NPR<\/a>\u00a0(again again again) and\u00a0Big Brains<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0NPR<\/a>\u00a0(again again again again).<\/p>\n

So, are you starting to formulate a hypothesis that there may be some grand scheme afoot here? Do you find yourself speculating that perhaps (just\u00a0perhaps<\/em>) there might be a coordinated effort to pathologize conspiracy theorists in order to justify locking them away in padded cells?<\/p>\n

Do you find it interesting that the terms \u201cconspiracy theory\u201d and \u201cmental disorder\u201d were forever linked in the public imagination when Richard Hofstadter penned his infamous 1964 essay in\u00a0Harper\u2019s Magazine<\/em>, \u201cThe Paranoid Style in American Politics<\/a>\u201c? Or that the best-remembered passage from that essay is the one in which he describes the \u201cstyle of mind\u201d behind the conspiracy-prone, populist political movement of his era as \u201cthe paranoid style\u201d because \u201cno other word adequately evokes the sense of heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy that I have in mind\u201d? Or that his caveats to that \u201cdiagnosis\u201d\u2014namely, that \u201cI am not speaking in a clinical sense, but borrowing a clinical term for other purposes\u201d and that \u201cI have neither the competence nor the desire to classify any figures of the past or present as certifiable lunatics\u201d\u2014are largely forgotten?<\/p>\n

Then the dinosaur media pundits and their psychiatric \u201cexperts\u201d have a message for you: \u201cShut Up, Conspiracy Theorist!<\/a>, or we\u2019re going to put you in a straitjacket!\u201d<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t believe me? Well . . .<\/p>\n

First They Came for the Truthers . . .<\/h3>\n
\n\n\n\n
<\/td>\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

The idea that those who believe in conspiracy theories are mentally unsound is, of course, not a new one.<\/p>\n

Witness how the subject was treated on\u00a0Barney Miller<\/em>, a popular American television sitcom from the late 1970s that centered on the exploits of a cast of detectives in a New York City Police Department station house. In\u00a0one episode from 1981<\/a>, a man is arrested for breaking into the offices of the Trilateral Commission because, as he explains in an impassioned speech that is bizarrely punctuated by canned laughter, \u201cwhat they are really up to is a scheme to plant their own loyal members in positions of power in this country; to work to erase national boundaries and create an international community; and, in time, bring about a one world government, with David Rockefeller calling the shots!\u201d<\/p>\n

The man then presents his evidence of this conspiracy in the form of articles in periodicals like\u00a0Conspiracy Review<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Suppressed Truth Round-up<\/em>. Barney Miller\u2019s sneering reaction (along with the ever-present laugh track) is enough for the viewer to understand that this burglar\u2014and, by implication, anyone who harbours similar views about the Trilateral Commission or other globalist institutions\u2014is a delusional criminal who deserves to be locked up for those beliefs.<\/p>\n

Or take the \u201ctin foil hat\u201d conceit. As the crack journalists over at\u00a0Vice<\/em>\u00a0helpfully explain<\/a>, the concept of wearing a tin foil hat to protect one\u2019s brain from government mind control was introduced into popular culture via Julian Huxley\u2019s 1927 story, \u201cThe Tissue-Culture King<\/a>.\u201d In Huxley\u2019s tale, \u201ccaps of metal foil\u201d are used to mitigate the effects of a mad scientists\u2019 telepathic hypnosis experiment. Since then, the \u201ctin foil hat-wearing madman\u201d has gone on to become a ubiquitous\u00a0pop culture trope<\/a>, employed by lazy TV writers as an easy way to signal to the audience that someone is suffering from paranoid delusions about vast government conspiracies.<\/p>\n

Or take President Lyndon Johnson\u2019s advisor, John P. Roche, who wrote a letter to the\u00a0Times Literary Supplement<\/em>\u00a0that was picked up and\u00a0reported on by\u00a0<\/a>Time<\/a><\/em>\u00a0in January of 1968. In the letter, Roche dismisses conspiracy theories about the JFK assassination as the gospel of \u201ca priesthood of marginal paranoids\u201d and declares such theories \u201can assault on the sanity of American society, and I believe in its fundamental sanity.\u201d<\/p>\n