Even before his increasingly successful presidential run, Donald Trump was well known as being a promoter of conspiracy theories, which began with his accusations that President Obama was not born in the US, and was thus ineligible for the presidency. But how would a conspiracy theorist act if elected to the White House? Joseph E. Uscinski writes that while conspiracy theories resonate the most when they originate with the least powerful and accuse the most powerful, Trump’s conspiracy theories which target vulnerable groups such as refugees, immigrants and Muslim-Americans, could rally violent public support for his views

Uscinski, Joseph E.

LSE Research Online

blogs.lse.ac.ukhttp://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2016/03/30/if-trumps-rhetoric-around-conspiracy-theories-follows-him-to-the-white-house-it-could-lead-to-the-violation-of-rights-on-a-massive-scale/If Trump’s rhetoric around conspiracy theories follows him to theWhite House, it could lead to the violation of rights on a massivescale.Even before his increasingly successful presidential run, Donald Trump was well known as being apromoter of conspiracy theories, which began with his accusations that President Obama was notborn in the US, and was thus ineligible for the presidency. But how would a conspiracy theorist act ifelected to the White House? Joseph E. Uscinski writes that while conspiracy theories resonate themost when they originate with the least powerful and accuse the most powerful, Trump’s conspiracytheories which target vulnerable groups such as refugees, immigrants and Muslim-Americans,could rally violent public support for his views.For years, the Republican front-runner, and New York billionaire, Donald Trump has actively investigated,propagated, or defended many conspiracy theories. He is perhaps the most publicly conspiratorial presidentialcontender in recent US history. Trump’s foray into the conspiratorial began with Birtherism, the idea that PresidentBarack Obama was born outside of the US. When Trump’s investigation failed to provide evidence of a foreign birth,he moved on to suggest conspiracies about Obama’s college transcripts and more recently the 9/11 attacks. He isalso dancing around the government’s role in potentially covering for accomplices in the San Bernardino shootings.Given the current electoral landscape, there is a significant possibility that Donald Trump will become the nextpresident of the United States. With his tendency to publicly endorse or condone conspiracy theories, how he mightlead the country?Conspiracy theories scapegoat a group and accuse them of committing evil acts. When this powerful rhetoricaldevice is used by the state against the vulnerable, they become dangerous because the scapegoating is nowbacked by the threat or use of force. If we look outside the US, Hitler, Stalin and Mao propagated conspiracytheories targeting vulnerable domestic groups. This led to the deaths of millions. The current Castro and Kim Jong-un regimes in Cuba and North Korea, respectively, use conspiratorial rhetoric to maintain control. It goes withoutsaying that the political arrangements in WWII-era Germany, Russia, and China and contemporary Cuba and NorthKorea are very different than those in the US, but what they do suggest is that consolidated power and conspiracythinking don’t mix well, particularly when the leaders are the ones levying the charges of conspiracy.We have witnessed smaller scale incidents in US history. Even before Independence from England, innocentwomen were tortured and murdered because local governments thought they had conspired with Satan. In the1950s, the House Un-American Activities Committee pitted the full power of the Congress against Hollywood actorsand writers. Many laws were passed during the Red Scare violating the rights of millions. Conspiracy theories aboutJapanese-Americans during World War II led to internment camps. These incidents are telling of what can happenwhen the powerful use conspiracy theories to target the vulnerable.1/4Credit: Chay (Flickr, CC-BY-NC-SA-2.0 )Conspiracy theories have been long intertwined in our politics. Since the revolution, Americans have been alerted toconspiracies by the Illuminati, Freemasons, Catholics, monopoly trusts, communists, and many, many, others.Conspiracy theories are not confined to a pathological fringe: polls suggest that all Americans believe in at least one,many believe in several. Despite their generally bad reputation, conspiracy theories can alert people to comingdangers, encourage good behavior by powerful, and hold the leaders accountable for wrongdoing. In this context,conspiracy theories can be a net positive: just consider the two cheeky journalists at the Washington Post whofollowed a conspiracy theory to bring down a corrupt president.But such benefits are not sometimes without grave costs. Conspiracy theorists act on dubious information, engagein scapegoating, and worse, they have attempted and committed murder and other acts of terrorism. Take TimothyMcVeigh for example – he believed the government was plotting to take away rights, so he conspired against thegovernment by killing 168 and injuring over 600. Or examine the events at Ruby Ridge. Government agentsbelieved that groups in the northwest were conspiring, among other things, to overthrow the government, so theyconspired to infiltrate and subdue these groups. These groups, ironically, believed that the government wasconspiring against them. This toxic mix ended with the US Government paying out $3.1 million for killing RandyWeaver’s wife and son and then conspiring to cover-up the circumstances of those deaths. These two cases areextreme and unusual; the vast majority of people who believe in conspiracy theories do not commit either violence orconspiracy-inspired violence. But when such cases do arise, they are of little surprise to social scientists, who findthat those who are the most drawn to conspiracy thinking are also the most accepting of violence and the mostwilling to conspire themselves to reach their ends.But now imagine if we were to put a conspiracy theorist into the presidency, sitting at the most powerful desk in theworld, complete with the codes to a nuclear arsenal and control over a military apparatus more powerful than anyother.In the US, conspiracy theories resonate most when they originate from the least powerful and accuse the mostpowerful. Those without power use conspiracy theories to close ranks, stay alert, point out potential dangers, andcall for action against a more powerful opponent. In modern party politics this has usually taken the form of the out-of-power party accusing the in-power party of conspiring. For example, as President George W. Bush left office, thepublic became less interested in theories that pinned 9/11 conspiracies on him, and instead became fascinated by2/4the new president’s birth certificate. Using a time-series of 120,000 letters to the editor of major newspapers, wehave shown that this pattern goes back at least to the 1890s. After reading these letters and picking out the ones thatespouse a conspiracy theory, we found that during the years a Republican is in the White House, conspiracytheories about the Right occupy about 16 percent of our conspiracy theory letters each year, but they decrease to 5percent when a Democrat is in the White House. Conspiracy theories about the Left occupy about 6 percent of ouryearly sample during Republican Administrations, but increase to 15 percent during Democratic ones. This trend isthe same for both elite and non-elite letter writers. Who controls the White House invites conspiracy theories tothemselves and their party.While this pattern has led to overheated rhetoric and occasional gridlock, the effects are usually benign because theaccused are usually powerful and well-protected. When powerful actors attempt to use conspiracy theories to attackthe less powerful, those conspiracy theories generally fail to resonate because Americans view them as unseemly;we don’t like to see the weak be attacked by the strong with conspiracy theories. For example, President Bill Clintonreceived little sympathy when his wife blamed their troubles on a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” That this conspiracytheory became a punchline is a good thing; we would not have wanted the president to rally public support forhunting down and bringing to justice those supposed “right-wing conspirators.” This is one reason why having aconspiracy theorist in the White House becomes dangerous. Should they be able to rally support around aconspiracy theory, it could lead to the violation of rights on a massive scale.Many of Trump’s more popular conspiracy theories accuse powerful well-protected actors of engaging inconspiracies (i.e. Barack Obama). Trump’s conspiracy theorizing becomes more dangerous when he bucks usualtrends and turns his attention away from the powerful and to the more vulnerable. He has suggested that Mexicanimmigrants are murderers, rapists, and drug dealers, and that they are part of a plot by the Mexican government. Hehas suggested that Syrian refugees and Muslims more generally are secret ISIS terrorists, and that there are giantnetworks of Muslim-Americans who aided, abetted, and continue to cover-up terrorist attacks. On top of hisconspiracy theories, Trump’s rhetoric blames foreigners and immigrants for taking our jobs and our money, usuallywith allusions to violence: “They’re killing us!”Trump may or may not believe his own rhetoric; it’s hard to know. If he truly does have a conspiratorial mindset, thenhis actions – if he were to become president – will be partly driven by his dubious beliefs. Richard Nixon’s time inoffice provides a preview. Nixon believed that journalists, Jews, Democrats and intellectuals were conspiring againsthim. So he used the power of the federal government to conspire against them. Recent admissions about the originsof this country’s drug war claim that the war on drugs was part of Nixon’s plot to go after anti-war protesters andblacks.But even if Trump’s conspiracy theorizing is merely an act, he has shown not just that he knows how, but also that heis very willing to use conspiratorial rhetoric to rally (sometimes violent) support. Note that whether Trump believesthis or not, many of his supporters do, and his past rhetoric will entrap him, bending his behavior toward theirexpectations.Conspiracy theorists are often tactically brilliant in climbing the greasy pole to leadership but they’re oftenstrategically daft when they get to the top. It’s hard to sustain fear for extended periods of time, and it’s hard tomaintain credibility or craft effective policy when relying on conspiratorial arguments. (See for example, Venezuela.)Stalin’s paranoid purges almost cost him his state (Nazi Germany attacked after he had destroyed much of hisofficer corps); Hitler’s obsession with Untermenschen conjured up an unwinnable war Germany couldn’t escape;Nixon’s dirty tricks booted him from office in disgrace. Should Trump become president, his current conspiracy-driven policy views could either force him to act, or leave him with the consequence of his followers acting where hedoes not.Please read our comments policy before commenting.         Note:  This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USAPP – American Politics and Policy, nor3/4the London School of Economics.Shortened URL for this post: http://bit.ly/1UVaGy2_________________________________ About the authorJoseph E. Uscinski – University of MiamiJoseph E. Uscinski is Associate Professor of Political Science at University of Miami’s College ofArts & Sciences and co-author of American Conspiracy Theories with Joseph M. Parent (OxfordUniversity Press, 2014).CC BY-NC 3.0 2015 LSE USAPP4/4

If Trump’s rhetoric around conspiracy theories follows him to the White House, it could lead to the violation of rights on a massive scale

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online