Peter Dale Scott is a batshit insane conspiracy theorist;
that is, he rejects the label “conspiracy theory”, of course, going instead for
“deep politics”, a branch of pseudoscience for which he may claim to be the
proud founder. Scott is also a former English professor at the University of
California, Berkeley, and a former diplomat (he is Canadian, though his career
in the US arguably qualifies him for inclusion in our Encyclopedia). That
doesn’t confer much authority on the subject matter of deep politics, and it is
telling that his “research” is published in book-length monologues from
non-academic publishers rather than in peer-reviewed journals.
Though he avoids the standard references to organized shadow
groups such as the Illuminati,
Scott maintains that a large number of terrorist acts and assassinations
(including JFK and Anders Breivik) are inside jobs; perhaps not fully, consciously and
carefully planned and organized from the top – there is no unified group at said
top – but inside jobs nonetheless (he has, though, thus far, as far as I can
tell, refrained from proclaiming 9/11 an inside job, though it was, it seems, a
result of deep politics – there are some comments on his book on the issue
here).
Despite the absence of a powerful, single, unified conspiracy, Scott’s theories
nevertheless relies on “secret” decisions made by “small cabals” of persons
within our (public) governmental institutions,
for the deliberate purpose of replacing the “public” dimension. Evidence that
these are inside jobs or that such evil, secret plots exist? Well, governments
have been involved in lots of shit over the years, so it is not impossible that
they could have organized these things as well. “But,” you might object, “could hypothetically have does not imply
did.” Ah, yes, but you see, officially Scott is really
Just Asking Questions (he just tends to forget sometimes).
Besides, he can point to nefarious government schemes at some times in some
places in the past (mostly Italian fascists, in fact) – so he has the resources
to mingle his narratives with actually documented claims. And when you
selectively look at the evidence gathered at various conspiracy sites and fail
to distinguish an untested hypothesis from a fact, it all fits. It is worth pointing out that Scott has no background in critical
thinking or scientific reasoning, nor does he display any interest in how
psychological biases work.
I really don’t wish to link to much of Scott’s drivel,
though as a typical example I can give you his “9/11, the JFK Assassination,
and the Oklahoma City Bombing as a Strategy of Tension” (here).
As usual, he mixes the reasonably well-documented claims about governments
being involved in organized crime (and as usual, the examples are from Italy),
to claim that at least the following were false flag operations by shady government cabals: JFK, the assassination of Robert Kennedy, the 1993
first World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and 9/11 or
at least “the subsequent false flag anthrax attacks of 2001”. Because these are
structurally similar to the other examples and because governments used these
events to implement new laws; no, the distinction between using an event for
political gain – and it is in most cases pretty unclear what these gains might
have been – and deliberately planning and carrying out that event, is not one
Scott is overly concerned with. Nor is he very concerned with accuracy or
avoiding question-begging (“all of these events were blamed on marginal
left-wing elements, but in fact involved elements inside America’s covert
intelligence agencies, along with their shadowy underworld connections”).
Diagnosis: Scott is, in fact, among the most influential
conspiracy theorists out there, and by mixing his batshit, evidence-free
musings with long, more or less accurate explanations of actual, historical events
he manages sometimes to create an illusion of carefulness and sensitivity to
evidence. But really, there is little to distinguish his claims from those made
by your standard whale.to mainstay (and Scott is, in fact, one of those himself).
No comments:
Post a Comment