With the rise of the internet and the advent of social media, the popularity of conspiracy theories has soared. Even so, QAnon and Trumpists are rank amateurs when compared to an old master conspiracy theorist like the late Herbert W Armstrong! Unfortunately, former members of Armstrong’s now defunct Worldwide Church of God (along with more traditional Christians) have tended to focus more on Armstrong’s heretical teachings/doctrines and have ignored the conspiracy theories which underpinned everything he taught and exploited the folks who were already susceptible to that kind of thinking. Indeed, most of the critics of Armstrongism are so unaccustomed to thinking of the cult in these terms that a detailed explanation is necessary.
Was Mr. Armstrong a conspiracy theorist? In the first installment of a two-part article for Psychology Today, Doctor Joe Pierre observed that conspiracy theories “begin with a rejection of authoritative accounts and generally accepted beliefs.” (1) He went on to say that “That makes conspiracy theories different from, for example, religious beliefs that are grounded in faith and arguably a wish to believe. Conspiracy theories, in contrast, start with disbelief in conventional wisdom in favor of a kind of secret, malevolent, ‘real story’ that’s being hidden from the public through some cover-up. There’s good evidence that this disbelief is rooted in mistrust, although I think that’s an underappreciated aspect of how conspiracy theories arise.” (1) For those who are familiar with Herbert Armstrong and his teachings, the connections to Pierre’s comments will be immediately apparent.
Armstrong taught that Satan launched a grand conspiracy through human agents like Simon Magus, the Emperor Constantine, and the Roman Catholic Church to change the day of worship from the Sabbath to Sunday. In similar fashion, he taught that those same forces had successfully subverted Christ’s gospel and substituted a completely unrelated message of their own! In short, the more traditional, mainstream version of Christianity was part of a nefarious conspiracy to cover up THE TRUTH and was NOT to be trusted. Indeed, for Herbert and his followers, those deceived (and/or malicious co-conspirators) weren’t really Christians at all! What about the actual history of Christianity? What about the actual story of the evolution of Christian thought? Never mind that stuff! It was all part of the coverup! In this way, Armstrong so thoroughly discredited religious scholars and historians that anything which they offered that contradicted his narrative was quickly dismissed by his followers.
Even so, for Herbert Armstrong, Satan wasn’t the only one capable of hatching a grand conspiracy – He believed that God himself had hidden the true identity of the English-speaking peoples of the world! Their true identity (that they were Israelites, and the heirs to the promises made to Abraham), once revealed, explained why those peoples had controlled so much of the world and its wealth for the previous two or three centuries! And, once again, his followers could see what religious, historical, and scientific scholars were blind and/or oblivious to! The “Plain Truth” was there for everybody to see, but it could only be seen by those whom God had specially called to himself and opened their minds to these understandings. In other words, Armstrong and his followers were privy to things that were hidden from the public-at-large and their scholarly elites!
What kind of people are susceptible to such conspiracy theories? In the same article referenced above, Pierre went on to observe that “people who believe in conspiracy theories aren’t usually so much theorizing and coming up with explanations on their own as they are hearing them from other people or finding them online.” (1) In this scenario, Mr. Armstrong is the source – he is Q! Moreover, as the revelator of the conspiracy, Mr. Armstrong claimed to be God’s chosen apostle – that God had revealed this conspiracy through him! In the article for Psychology Today, Pierre also identified “a number of cognitive quirks” that folks who are susceptible to conspiracy theories tend to share. Among these, he underscored a “need for certainty” and “closure” – a need to explain the reality which they are experiencing. He went on to say that “Conspiracy theories have also been found to be more likely in people who tend not to think analytically or have a need for uniqueness, which might make them attracted to some hidden secret narrative that no one else knows about.” (1) Does that ring any bells for current and former Armstrongites?
In the second part of his article on conspiracy theories, Pierre went on to point out some of the features of our “post-truth” world, and how it has spawned anti-science movements. He observed that “Authors like George Orwell or Hannah Arendt wrote about how such movements are grounded in a revolt against ‘elites’ and ‘experts’ and thrive on raising doubts about whether facts exist and repeating lies often enough that they are taken to be truths.” (2) A little later, the doctor also made clear that this cannot be characterized as legitimate skepticism. He pointed out that “Skepticism in science is about not believing in something unless there is objective evidence and being skeptical about the reliability of one-time, subjective observations.” (2) Pierre continued: “While conspiracy <theorists> often claim to be skeptics, they’re often really more denialists who are actively rejecting the evidence. There’s a core feeling that authority and experts aren’t to be trusted, which then paves the way towards embracing more outlandish ideas. In this way, when mistrust manifests as denialism, it leaves us vulnerable to misinformation.” (2)
Pierre also makes clear that belief in conspiracy theories is not benign or harmless. He observed that “Belief in conspiracy theories has been shown to be associated with a variety of negative outcomes.” (2) He went on to say that “When we hold beliefs with extreme conviction — not only conspiracy theories but often political and religious beliefs — and when we feel the need to defend them as part of our identity, they can often get us into trouble in our social interactions with other people.” (2) He continued: “My view is that holding beliefs with ‘cognitive flexibility’ — the ability to concede that we might be wrong, especially when there’s an actual lack of evidence — is a far more healthy way to have faith in our beliefs.” (2) In other words, someone is very likely to be hurt or negatively impacted in some way as a consequence of this kind of thinking.
Think that this is all just a bunch of meaningless psychobabble? Some of Doctor Pierre’s commentary on conspiracy theories fits very nicely with some of the points that Craig Branch makes about cults in his article for the Apologetics Resource Center. (3) In that article, he points out a number of features of “Destructive Cult Ideology.” Branch underscores the fact that submission to leadership is one of the principal features of this kind of group. He wrote that “Leaders tend to be absolute, prophets of God, God Himself, specially anointed apostle, or just a strong, controlling, manipulative person who demands submission even if changes or conflicts occur in ideology or behavior.” (3) In other words, just as QAnon followers hang on every statement by Q, the followers of Herbert Armstrong used to hang on his every utterance!
However, the similarity between folks that are susceptible to conspiracy theories and those who belong to cults doesn’t end there! Branch goes on to point out that cults often have a “polarized world view,” that “The group is all that is good; everything outside is bad.” (3) Another feature which the two groups share is characterized in the same article as the “denigration of rational thinking.” (3) And, finally, the feature which is probably the most destructive of those shared by both groups is characterized by Branch as the “Severing of Ties with Past, Family, Friends, Goals, and Interests – Especially if they are negative towards or impede the goals of the group.” (3) In other words, the belief becomes more important than the individual, any person who doesn’t buy into the conspiracy theory, or any activities which don’t serve to oppose it (or further the interests of the group).
In short, Herbert Armstrong and his Worldwide Church of God were way ahead of the curve when it came to promulgating and perpetuating conspiracy theories. Indeed, looking back on my experiences in that organization, the devotion which many of us invested in Armstrong’s conspiracy theories makes QAnon followers and Trumpists look like lightweights by comparison! And, just like the followers of that consummate conspiracy theorist (Herbert Armstrong), many of the followers of these modern manifestations of this phenomenon will someday realize that a majority of the theories which they swallowed had no basis in truth or reality!
Sources:
(1) Understanding the Psychology of Conspiracy Theories - Part 1
(2) Understanding the Psychology of Conspiracy Theories - Part 2
(3) Cult or Cultic?
Armstrong's conspiracy theory was basically recycled Protestant Anti-Catholicism, mixed in with Hislop's Two Babylon's and 7th Day Adventist prophecy teachings. The Armstrongite's who buy into this hodge-podge almost never do any reading of the history of these ideas. If they did, they would discover that Protestant Anti-Catholicism was basically black propaganda, that Hislop was ridiculed by historically literate people in his lifetime, and the Adventists prophecy failures are too numerous to mention. Sadly, most ACOG members will never do any independent reading. As long as they have an ACOG minister looking over their shoulders, that will almost never happen.
ReplyDeleteI agree!
Delete