Conspiracy theories do not fall from the sky
Conspiracy theories are not a new phenomenon. They usually have a long history before being seen in the mainstream. Today, with the rise of post-factual politics, fragments of right-wing conspiracy theories are once again unfolding their effects.
In one of the last crises of the 21st century, we have entered the post-factual era and it seems that many are blind in the right eye. The last two decades in Central Europe, and probably in the United States as well, have been marked by several developments concerning conspiracy theories. First, the resurgence of (right-wing) conspiracy thinking, especially after 9/11. Second, the rise of nativist populism. Third, attacks by right-wing extremists motivated by conspiracy theories. Fourth, the (re)rise of right-wing views and subsequent infiltration into the heart of society. The use of terms such as “exchange” in political discourse about migration or in controversial debates about migration as such is evidence of this.
Conspiratorial thinking is not right-wing per se, nor can it be historically legitimized, but developments in recent years show that “right-wing” ideologies have gained traction in public discourse: equating the persecution of Jews under the Nazi state with surveillance during the Corona crisis is a tasteless transgression. Wearing a yellow “Ungeimpft” (unvaccinated) star is a symbol of provocation and relativization of the suffering of Jewish men and women.
Yet, so-called “dissidents” include people from both the right and the left, and even former staunch Green voters. Francis Fukuyama calls this situation identity politics or rather the absence of identity politics. According to Fukuyama, it is no longer a matter of left or right-wing ideologies per se, but of who can politically compensate for the subjectively perceived loss of identity. It is clear that right-wing populists are currently much more successful in this regard than left-wing actors. The following explanations do not explain the entire story just sketched. It highlights several elements of right-wing conspiracy theories that are (still) having an impact today.
The French Revolution as an origin
Conspiracy theories proliferated during and after the French Revolution and were based on discourses that had already emerged years before the Revolution. In 1797, this conspiracy thinking culminated in the publication of the books “Mémoires pour servir à l’histoire du jacobinisme” by the exJesuit and refugee in London before the Revolution, Augustin Barruel (1741-1820), as well as “Proofs of a Conspiracy” by the Edinburgh professor of natural philosophy John Robison (1739-1805). A similar work was published in 1803 by Johann August Starck (1741-1816), chief preacher of Darmstadt. Although these publications were very different from each other, they had in common that they attributed the French Revolution to a conspiracy of radical philosophers, radical Freemasons and the Illuminati. It was assumed that these groups were working for “equality” and “freedom” throughout the world. The rejection of secret societies or the highlighting of their conspiratorial activities is still omnipresent in conspiracy theories today. The same applies to the “fight” against cosmopolitanism. In today’s (right-wing) conspiracy theories, cosmopolitans are called “globalists”.
This conspiracy theory, and in particular the fear of the Illuminati, has been imported into the United States. Not only did Scottish clergymen in the background recommend “Proofs of a Conspiracy” to American preachers and important people, but it was also migrants who brought Robison’s book to the United States, at least in New England. This occurred at a time when the United States enacted the Alien and Sedition Acts (1798-1801), which targeted immigrants who were trying to start a new life in the United States following the French Revolution. The immigrants were accused of being secretly enlightened or Jacobin. During the presidential campaign, supporters of John Adams stigmatized Thomas Jefferson as a crank. It was not until Jefferson became president in 1801 that the conspiracy theory faded.
It was not until a few years later, in 1828, that the Anti-Masonic Party was founded, an initially successful populist party directed against the elite, i.e., the Masons, and committed to protective tariffs and better domestic policy. The history of this party is admittedly short, but it shows early on the link between populisms and conspiracy theories.
Although right-wing conspiracy theories are often anti-Semitic, the original form of the French Revolution was not directed against Jews, but this was soon to change: in 1806, Barruel received a letter from the Piedmontese soldier Simonini, which had far-reaching consequences and in which he made it clear that it was not the Illuminati or the Freemasons who profited most from the Revolution, but the Jews. Moreover, they had been pulling the strings for a long time in the shadows. Barruel was shocked by the contents and had the Vatican check whether Simonini could be trusted. Although this was confirmed, Barruel did not publish the letter. But several copies circulated in right-wing circles between Paris, London, Freiburg and St. Petersburg. It was not until 1878 that the letter was printed for the first time. Simonini’s letter was then frequently quoted. The famous conspiracy theorist Nesta Webster was the first person to link the letter to the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.
The “Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Conspiracy theories directed against Freemasons and Jews thus undoubtedly originated in the 18th century. During the 19th century, this conspiracy model became denser to explain revolutions and was also used repeatedly in apocalyptic texts, notably in Russia. It was precisely such an apocalyptic text that made the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” famous: a first known version appeared in 1903, but it was a 1917 book by the apocalyptic Sergei Nilus (1862-1929) containing the Protocols that eventually spread them. Nilus interpreted the imminent decline of the monarchy in Russia as an apocalypse and saw “Judeo-Masonry” as a vehicle of Satan. The inserted protocols function here as a reference for the diabolical plan. So it took a crisis, the revolution in Russia, the end of World War I and the post-war economic slump for the Protocols to be disseminated. Russian emigrants brought Nilu’s book to Europe and the United States beginning in 1918.
The Protocols themselves are a speech of about 60-80 pages delivered by an unnamed Jewish leader. It is not known when or where the speech was delivered. It describes a rather widespread Jewish-Masonic plan to infiltrate the world. We learn that revolutions were started with the help of Freemasons or that the press was controlled. At the end of the conspiracy, a world leader elected by the Sages will bring all the powers together and impose a new, strict leadership.
For a long time researchers believed that the Protocols had a clear history, impossible to describe here, but Michael Hagemeister’s recent findings show that the author remains unknown and the purpose of the Protocols’ creation is unclear.
As early as 1921 the Times revealed that the minutes were “forgeries,” but it seems more appropriate to speak of plagiarism: the main reference was “Dialogue aux enfers entre Machiavel et Montesquieu, ou la politique de Machiavel au XIX e siècle” (1864) by French jurist Maurice Joly (1829-1878). The book, however, makes no reference to a Jewish plot. This aspect was captured by Machern through the so-called “rabbi’s speech,” which appears in the novel “Biarritz” (1868) by Herrmann Goedsche (1815-1878). In addition, other works were included in the record. Between 1933 and 1937, a trial was held in Bern that, among other things, aimed to clarify the creation story. Plagiarism was also found in this case.
The protocols played a role in Nazi propaganda, but they were not as important as one might think. Adolf Hitler referred to them in “Mein Kampf,” but the question of “truth” or “authenticity” was cleverly avoided. Goebbels learned of the Protocols through Henry Ford’s book “The International Jew” and, based on the revelations in the Times, came to the famous conclusion that he believed the internal truth and not the factual truth of the Protocols. This may seem surprising, but it is a well-known feature of conspiratorial thinking: first, it is not about the truth, but the actions of Jewish men and women prove to a convinced conspiracy theorist that the Protocols are correct; second, it seems that the content itself is not the issue, but only the existence of a possible plan and the myth formed around the Protocols are decisive for their reception even today.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a widely used and regularly republished anti-Semitic book. They also seem to play an important ideological role in the Middle East conflict within the anti-Israel camp-they are especially anchored in the Hamas charter-as they seem to explain what Jews are capable of.
The myth of “Eurabia
With his act of violence in Norway, Anders Behring Breivik shocked the world in 2011. In his “manifesto” published shortly before his act, he defended the conspiracy theory that Muslims had conspired with European elites to turn Europe into a predominantly Muslim society. In particular, this conspiracy theory emphasizes that Europe’s homogeneous identity is being infiltrated from the outside by Muslim migrants and sold by its own elites. Breivik’s “manifesto,” however, had already been preceded by a multitude of publications. These were quasi-scientific treatises, but also novels, as well as political programs of anti-Islamic and especially anti-immigration parties in Europe.
The first catalyst on the road to the “Eurabia” conspiracy theory was 9/11 and the anti-Muslim resentment felt around the world after the attacks. The next acceleration was the global economic crisis of 2007, followed by the so-called migrant crisis in 2014/15. It was during this period that the anti-George Soros conspiracy theory was born in Hungary, which developed into the ruling party’s conspiracy ideology; again associated with anti-Semitism. Soros, a Hungarian Jew, is accused of being the mastermind of the migration crisis, whose real goal is the dissolution of European nation-states. Apart from the Hungarian example, it is mainly the identity movement and PEGIDA that propose conspiracy theories about Eurabia. It is only with the migration crisis that the “Eurabia” conspiracy theory has been perceived within society.
From “people change” to “Great Replacement.”
Based on or in conjunction with the “Eurabia” conspiracy theory, it is worth mentioning the “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, which not only targets Muslims, but directly highlights the possible loss of “white” European identity. This conspiracy theory is based on three basic pillars of far-right thinking: anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and white supremacist ideas. In addition, people like Soros, groups like Jews or systems like the EU are directly attacked.
It is worth noting the apparent intellectual disguise: while the term “Umvolkung” has long been part of right-wing vocabulary, “the great replacement” is the new concept of the New Right, which operates online. Building on already diverse conspiratorial ideas about migrant infiltration, it is especially Renaud Camus’ fictional work “Le Grand Remplacement” (2011) that has been of great importance to the New Right. In his book, Camus speaks of a loss of identity due to immigration and warns of “deculturation,” that is, the loss of European culture. Camus speculates that elites conspired to impose the Great Replacement with a plan worked out well in advance. Among other things, he points to the power of the World Economic Forum in Davos (“Davos-cracy”) and wants to express that the most diverse individuals, groups and institutions would work together to make everything interchangeable and thus indistinguishable.
Camus’s ideas have been taken up by the far right in France, German-speaking countries, Britain, and the United States: During far-right marches in Charlottesville in 2017, participants chanted “You will not replace us.” “White genocide” is often referred to in English-speaking countries. In 2019, an attempted attack on a synagogue failed in Halle. The far-right author was convinced that Germany was infiltrated by Jewish elites and opposed, according to him, a Zionist occupation government (ZOG), another ideology of far-right conspiracy theories. In the same year, a right-wing extremist killed 51 people in Christchurch, New Zealand, in attacks on two mosques. Shortly before, he had posted the manifesto “The Great Replacement” online. The author also extolled Breivik’s attack. In 2020, a right-wing extremist killed nine people of immigrant origin in Hanau, Germany. The author defended several conspiracy theories. He was also a follower of QAnon, according to which a so-called Satanist elite kidnaps children to extract rejuvenating substances.
The “Great Replacement” functions as a deliberately vague umbrella term. Corrupt cosmopolitan elites, the “globalists,” become the opponents of the nation-state, the “people,” and ultimately the white race. The problem is that every single case can confirm the theory: every Muslim trade that replaces an established trade thus becomes part of the conspiratorial explanation. But every decision made at the highest level in favor of immigration is also seen as evidence of the conspiracy theory.
Conclusion
Effective conspiracy theories do not fall from the sky. In most cases, they have a long history before they are perceived by the mainstream. This depends on several developments: Global social crises play a decisive role. It is only the associated search for meaning, the feeling of powerlessness, and the search for exchange, community, and identity that can lead to conspiracy theories being considered as “plausible” explanations of events, developments, or situations. Right-wing conspiracy theories appear problematic in the context of the rise of post-factual politics: right-wing populists tend to incorporate elements of conspiracy theories into their political agenda, and this is currently successful. This so-called nativist populism aims to construct external enemies and see internal elites first as corrupt and then as part of a conspiracy (“deep state”).
Conspiracy theories may eventually trigger acts of violence such as bombings or violent demonstrations. This is a warning sign. However, this by no means means that everyone who believes in conspiracy theories will become violent. However, the accumulation of cases should give us pause.