Conspiracy Theories Rise Again: The Case of Blake Farenthold

Texas Congressional Representative Blake Farenthold seemed to endorse a bizarre conspiracy theory about the murder of Democratic National Committee employee Seth Rich. No surprise. Many, maybe most, Americans entertain at least one unjustified conspiracy theory. Was the moon landing faked? Did Sandy Hook really happen? Who killed JFK? Was 9/11 an inside job? In a 2016 Farleigh Dickson University PublicMind Poll, about 46% of respondents believe that it was definitely or possible true that "President Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks before they happened." In the same poll, 60% believed it to be true or possibly true that Hillary Clinton knew about the Benghazi attacks in advance. These beliefs are beyond silly, yet they spread.

Odd and implausible conspiracy theories have been around for a long time, as in this book about Feemasons, Illuminati, and Reading Societies--conspiracy theories that are, of course, still with us today. Note that the author had academic credentials and claimed to have "good authorities."

Recently, an unusually thin conspiracy theory holds that Seth Rich was murdered to cover up his supposed complicity in the hack of the DNC computers, which responsible authorities attribute to the Russian government. Fox News published a story about the unproven conspiracy theory, which they removed, rather tardily, six days later. Fox News commentator Sean Hannity also spread the conspiracy theory on his show. The conservative National Review called Hannity's conspiracy theory "shameful nonsense."

Not to be outdone, Rep. Farenthold implied to CNN that the Trump-Russia investigation was a distraction from the real story, which was that the hack of the DNC computer was "insider job." He justified this claim by saying that "There's stuff circulating on the Internet," and explaining that the Washington DC police had not studied Rich's computer themselves, but had used a contractor to examine the computer.

Farenthold obviously offered very thin evidence for a conspiracy. Unjustified conspiracy theories like this arise from minor anomalies and unanswered questions. In Rich's case, one unanswered question is why the mugger who attacked him did not take his wristwatch. That's not enough evidence to prove a conspiracy.

It is important to stop real conspiracies, but it is also important not to believe unproven ones. The all-time most popular post on my blog gives criteria for telling whether a conspiracy is real. Here are some especially critical criteria:

1. People who allege a conspiracy need to provide evidence for it.
2. Unanswered questions and anomalies are not evidence; at most, they give reason for more investigation.
3. It is part of the human condition that we don't know everything, and that even the best factual proof can leave room for error. 
3. Conspiracy theorists must respond in good faith when their questions are answered.
4. You can't prove that the government is evil just by spewing out unproven conspiracy theories.

Real, large-scale conspiracies are actually very rare, simply because one of the conspirators will want to talk and provide evidence. People want to tell their stories.

Why do conspiracy theories spread so easily? I'll talk about that in a few days.