A mate of mine is well into conspiracy theories. The one he aired last night stated that the CIA were well aware of 9/11 but deliberately let it happen to provide a rationale for the invasions of Afganistan and Iraq.
I am actually not a big fan of conspiracy theories. Now occasionally they are right (my friend pointed to the Gulf of Tonkin incident as evidence that the US had prior form in this area). But challenging someone's belief in a conspiracy theory is like challenging their religious or spiritual beliefs. It is a no-win situation. So from now on, I will just nod: "CIA, hmmm, Bilderberg, hmmm" - just as I nod when people start talking to me about Jesus or crystals.
These faith-based beliefs are a form of sensemaking. The world is a chaotic place and if there is a god or some other mystic power or shadowy group ultimately in charge then that's more comforting than the alternative. That no one is in charge.
Most large organisations are also rife with conspiracy theories. Takeovers, layoffs, wars and rumours wars. And sometimes these conspiracy theories are right. Most corporate communications guides advice the robust rebuttal of false rumours and the shining shield of truth. The thing is: we never wholly trust our leaders and nor should we. There will be circumstances where (for the best of reasons as well as the worst) they will withhold information from us. So we all live in the perpetual half-light of organisational uncertainty.
We should listen to the rumours and conspiracy theories but we should decide how we listen to them and how we take them - as fact, as myth, as desire or fear or as all four at once.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
if there is a choice between conspiracy theory or a stuff-up theory, always choose the stuff-up theory!
but in terms of just nodding... i guess sometimes that is good... but are we doing that with the awarness that our own theory is just that... a theory with no basis in itself.
awarness = awareness :-)
Post a Comment