![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
The Jesus Videos
Continuing with the conversation on conspiracy theory and religion and the similarities between the two: You may recall that yesterday I posted to a forum in response to one user’s defense of conspiracy theory; they wrote (in part)
Except it’s not a religion. It’s the truth, and it’s documented.
To which I responded that those are exactly the same arguments a Biblical Literalist would make in favor of their religion. Of course, this got some people pretty steamed up. But I stand by it, because I tend to think that when you have a religion, you don’t necessarily call it that. You simply just believe something to be unassailably true, and you find it impossible to admit any critical inquiry into it.
The person on that forum wrote back:
Ummm, yeah…
Except that a Biblical literalist’s documentation is a 2,000 year old fantasy created by a handful of manipulative schizos. Our documentation is reams of researched books and news articles from the last few decades, written by people who actually exist, about people that actually exist. We have a film of a bloody presidential coup d’etat. Where’s their film of Jesus performing miracles?
I almost wanted to make the argument that the only difference between what they’re saying and conspiracy theory is that instead of 2,000 year old fantasies created by manipulative schizos, ours are way more current! Not to characterize every conspiracy theorist as schizophrenic, but it’s not exactly always the most clear-thinking group of people who are finding faces on Mars and the like. I call myself a conspiracy theorist as well, so don’t jump down my throat about any of this either. I think there’s an important distinction to be made here though. Conspiracy theorists claim that they are looking for facts. But what they are really looking for is connections. And connections are SOMETIMES facts, sometimes speculation, and sometimes consist of something else entirely.
I’ll be the first person to admit that some of my favorite conspiracy theories - even ones that I myself have cooked up - rest on connections and not facts. I play fast and loose with the facts. I’ll go around and find sources that have elements I can use, and press them into service. Doesn’t matter what the sources are, as long as I can use them to my own ends. Actually, there’s a good term for this in cultural studies, Bricolage:
A person who engages in bricolage is a bricoleur. A bricoleur is a person who creates things from scratch, is creative and resourceful: a person who collects information and things and then puts them together in a way that they were not originally designed to do. […]
In cultural studies bricolage is used to mean the processes by which people acquire objects from across social divisions to create new cultural identities. In particular, it is a feature of subcultures such as, for example, the punk movement. Here, objects that possess one meaning (or no meaning) in the dominant culture are acquired and given a new, often subversive meaning. For example, the safety pin became a form of decoration in punk culture.
Conspiracy theorists often claim that what they are doing is more akin to journalism than anything else. But in my mind, it seems more like mythologizing. And I don’t think there’s anything wrong with that either. I think it’s a really positive thing. And I think that when we have myths that really work for us, it’s because we believe them to be true or at least possible. Otherwise, if they are mere intellectual curiousities, then they are symbolically dead.
One other thing I’d like to address, is when the commenter at that forum asked: “Where’s their film of Jesus performing miracles?” Is there anybody here who thinks that if Christians really did have a film of Jesus, that conspiracy theorists would actually believe it?
August 2nd, 2005 at 4:16 pm
We accept a lot of things on legend and not fact. Socrates never wrote a thing– did he really exist? Everyone says yes, but if you really examine it, there’s about as much evidence to say he didn’t exist as there is for Jesus Christ.
One of my favorite pseudo-mysteries (along the lines of the identity of Jack The Ripper) is whether or not Shakespeare wrote his own plays. There have been candidates bandied about all over the place, such as Sir Francis Bacon. Does that cast any aspersions upon the power and magnitude of Shakey’s plays? Not really.
I find that people who are hostile towards Christianity embrace a lot of the same insane reasoning that religious nuts possess. It’s a human thing, we all do it. But I think the teachings of people like Socrates or Jesus are an attempt to transcend that presumptive thinking. Science can be flawed too, you know.
For some, CT is religion, just as rock n roll is religion to some people. David Bowie made the rock/religion connection decades ago. I think it ties in with this seemingly innate need to mythologize.
As for me? Rock is more sacred to me than CT, but there’s a sexy, humorous, even dangerous element to both that keeps it all in perspective for me.
August 2nd, 2005 at 4:25 pm
rock and roll is a crusade. an invasion of foriegn countries by roving bands of long-haired(or shaved-headed) youths bringing a new way of thinking about life, love and the meaning of everything. couldn`t be anything like religion. you`d need an army to enforce a new doctrine, wouldn`t you?
August 2nd, 2005 at 4:29 pm
and that australian guy just made a movie about christ that many are taking as real. they even let kids watch the torture. cathoholics are a fun-loving bunch. a long thing being inserted into a person is o.k. as long as it causes pain. if it causes pleasure, ban it.
August 2nd, 2005 at 4:49 pm
I think we have to keep in mind that there are conspiracies that are real and are proven. Enron, Watergate, Savings & Loan, Iran Contra. And the perps of all those are Bush-connected. 19 muslim hijackers sneaking into our country and hijacking planes, that’s also a conspiracy. Everyone believes in conspiracies, some just aren’t politically correct.
But I really commented to say this: can’t we be Conspiray Hypothesists instead of Theorists? We need to articulate the distinction between looking for & suspecting connections and dogmatically believing in every crazy theory you hear on the internet. And what about being skeptical? If one should be skeptical of conspiracy theories, the surely one should be skeptical of the government’s version of events as well, right? Or is there a double standard?
August 2nd, 2005 at 4:53 pm
Crap, sorry for the typos. I’m on someone else’s computer and their font settings are tiny, so I can barely see what I’m typing. Anyway, conspiracy hypothesists, that’s what I meant.
(These comments need an edit feature)
August 2nd, 2005 at 5:30 pm
You’re making a lot of generalizations. Why even suggests that there is a coherent group of people called “conspiracy theorists”? You’re perpetuating the label and pigeonholing a large array of people into one class. Some find faces on Mars and blame it on the CIA. Some expose assassinations and domestic covert ops that actually exist.
Evaluate each on their own merit, rather than by convenient labels.
August 2nd, 2005 at 6:38 pm
I like labels! We all use them. There’s no way to stop. And using them gets people talking and thinking and moving in new directions. Anyway, I’m trying to look at social movements and AT the generalizations. I find it interesting to try and apply this shifting model to something totally amorphous
August 2nd, 2005 at 6:55 pm
No one’s suggesting we pay any less attention to the “real” conspiracies. What I’m saying is that we need to spend more attention on the unreal ones, and what purpose they serve culturally and individually.
August 2nd, 2005 at 8:48 pm
Okay, so the context here is the wacky far out stuff, not the government corruption stuff. I didn’t catch that.
August 2nd, 2005 at 9:02 pm
Well, honestly, I don’t think there’s any separating it culturally.
August 2nd, 2005 at 10:30 pm
Continuing on the thread of rock as religion:
“Jesus Christ Superstar” was a great musical.
Quentin Tarantino liked “The Passion Of The Christ”, because it was a good movie, not because of his beliefs. I respect Tarantino’s taste in movies, because he knows what he is talking about. In fact, Tarantino is a maniac when it comes to cinema, bordering on fanaticism.
That Australian guy who directed “The Passion” starred in “Conspiracy Theory” a movie that did no justice to CT thinking… although having Patrick Stewart as the villain was a stroke of genius.
I’ve always wanted someone to investigate rock and roll as a conspiracy: the KKK used to say it was the decline of civilization, white kids dancing to “negro music”. Who would want the Negroes to infiltrate the Sytem anyway? Communists, maybe?
August 3rd, 2005 at 12:35 am
fuck facts. i think conspiracy theorists would more properly be called analysts, with an emphasis on the anal. tarantino is a bricoleur. that’s why he rocks. djs digging in the crates, so bricolage. i love that idea, it’s been my unconscious style all my life but i never knew i was doing it. so do i now want to fuck up kill bill by analysing the fuck out of it, documenting which 1970s films his ideas really came from? it has absolutely nothing to do with the story!
and you’re so right about the connections being key, although what i think most conspiracy theorists are looking for is something to make themselves feel important, and that’s why it’s like a religion, so fucking important…
“we’re doing the hard work, fighting the good fight, got the whole thing on tape, 110%, yea verily the world is a better place for our remarkable achievements.”
yeah, way to hold down the block, gangsta.
“we don’t do the wacky stuff (rolls eyes), only the real stuff (stern forwn)”
there it is again, the quest for the machine’s respect. softcocks. really, it’s a wacky fucking existence. go hard.
“oh we’ve got all the dirt. it’s documented. it’s real.”
sfw? you’re living in the fucking matrix. nothing is proven. you don’t know shit about watergate, and even if you did it doesn’t change a fucking thing.
unless you mythologise. but the man’s got you thinking that that’s a bad thing so you stick to the facts. sucker, the devil’s in the details.
fuck keeping it real. keep it mythological. i suspect that myth, because it claims to be nothing but, is the only thing in this world that isn’t a complete sham.
honestly all this conspiracy theory stuff is retarded. let’s say we’re conspiracy hypothesists!! oh jesus, that will clear things up won’t it, and it doesn’t sound gay at all. just say the word hypothesis in a pub. go on.
conspiracy theory is a religion, and of the worst kind because it’s completely jackable, and has been jacked by charlatans and fools. because truth does not equal reality. remember at the end of the last temptation of christ, jesus is all like: but i didn’t die on the cross, it’s a lie. and paul says: shut up man, that has absolutely nothing to do with the story.
i’ve fucking had it with conspiracy theorists. from now on i’m going to be one of “history’s actors” sounds like more fun.
and all you “serious conspiracy theorists” can go and get fact.
August 3rd, 2005 at 1:42 am
i’m sympathetic to your conspiracy theory as religion project but honestly, that article you posted on the RI board was a pretty lame rant, so its little wonder the responses were so uptight.
August 3rd, 2005 at 10:36 am
Hehe. Albion, that’s exactly why I posted it! I got what I was looking for.
Carlos, pour it on baby!
August 3rd, 2005 at 11:11 am
That’s EXACTLY like the Wiccans who are always trying to claim that they don’t worship Satan
August 3rd, 2005 at 1:15 pm
[…] Anti-Conspiracy Theory
I received such a great comment from Carlos on my post about conspiracy theory as religion that I want to upgrade it to […]