THE EQUITY welcomes and typically errs to the side of publishing letters to the editor advancing all kinds of views, as long as they seem to be reasonably coherent arguments based on a reasonable interpretation of the facts, expressed in ways that are not gratuitously disparaging and, of course, do not engage in hate speech.
In this context, we recently declined the opportunity to publish a letter involving a criticism of a book which the author said he had not bothered to read, and which seemed simply to repeat familiar Trump-style conspiracy theories ubiquitous on unmoderated social media.
As publishers, we of course, have not only the right but the . . .
responsibility to make such judgements. But we are fully aware that it is an imperfect process, far from infallible and certain to displease someone somewhere along the line.
Some of the more common conspiracies floating around relate to billionaires and banks secretly trying to implement global communism, or COVID-19 being fake, or secret monolithic cabals controlling the world, among other suspicions that can be difficult to reconcile with the world around us.
These specific conspiracies are concerning in the sense that they are pushed by people and institutions that don’t seem to have the wellbeing of society in mind. Facebook makes money through preying on people’s worst fears and creating conflict which, in turn, makes a functioning civil society more difficult. What deliberations can be made between people who don’t share even the most basic conception of reality?
That isn’t to say that citizens should not be skeptical of official narratives, or that conspiracies never happen, or that we shouldn’t encourage critical thinking.
In addressing these conspiracy theories effectively, we should try to understand some of the underlying factors that can lead to an increasing amount of people to fall for them and separate these factors from the very real ways in which powerful forces affect our lives.
Economic globalization, for example, has brought profound change to how labour, resources and wealth are distributed around the planet, which has not been beneficial for millions of people around the world, including many in Canada. Facing competition from places where wages are significantly lower and in an economy dominated by multinational corporations that have no real stake in any community, a lot of people and places have been left behind.
The Pontiac is still living in the aftermath of the closure of the pulp mill in Portage-du-Fort, and an iron mine in Bristol before that, not to mention the ongoing challenges in the forestry sector, all sparked by economic changes that had nothing to do with anyone living here.
Many young people leave the Pontiac to find work, and those who remain are left hoping for a new industry to come in to revitalize the region, like agritourism, or a waste-to-energy plant.
While enterprising individuals and businesses can do well, the degree to which we can influence the economic circumstances that could make a significant difference locally is restrained by design.
We live in a world where our economic life is not determined democratically. We live in a world where the ultra-wealthy often have a vastly disproportionate influence on decisions that should be made collectively. We live in a world where wealth, and therefore power, is concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. We live in a world where politicians and corporate media are often less than objective. We live in a world that could be far more democratic and transparent than it currently is.
That last point is true not only at the international level where unaccountable central bankers coordinate monetary policy but is also true on the local level where regional mayors effectively make most of their decisions by closed doors in “in-camera sessions.”
All this being said, it’s easy to see how people who rightfully feel powerless as their communities fall apart in front of them turn to simple narratives of evil shadowy figures behind everything.
But it’s not that simple. Most of the time people in power aren’t evil, but they are often unaccountable. Decisions made in the past have created a world that empowers groups of people with a specific set of interests to call the shots at the expense of everyone else.
That’s not a conspiracy theory.
Political parties, powerful corporations and other powerful actors benefit from citizens with an under-developed ability to think critically. Falling for narratives about globalization being a plot by sinister forces or COVID-19 being fake seems to benefit politicians and other powerful forces who aren’t going to make peoples’ lives better.
On the other hand, globalization obviously benefits some at the expense of others, and governments have used COVID-19 to increase their powers in ways that should make people nervous.
There is a difference between falling for easy narratives pushed on social media and engaging in the complicated process of trying to cut through political spin and honestly debating who benefits from what actions.
Part of the answer may involve reforming our political institutions to empower and engage people. This could be as simple as introducing proportional voting systems to ensure a more diverse representation of voices is heard in Parliament or the provincial legislature or it could be a little more revolutionary in the sense of moving towards more direct democracy.
Either way, if people genuinely felt able to influence lives though legitimate political means, which would require more than just scrolling through Facebook, these kinds of fantasies would maybe decline. With a direct stake in the outcomes people would have to engage with the complicated reality of how things really are a little more.
A system that is more democratic and actually provides stability in peoples’ lives may be the answer.
Brett Thoms
