Over the last few months, I've been reading more political research than I can usually stomach, mostly in an effort to satisfy myself on various questions that have come up before, during, and since the November 2020 elections (none of which is my point here). I've read and watched videos from people of various political stripes, including of course libertarians (which was as far afield as I'd gone before) but also some different varieties of Q-Anon'ers (which initially gave me the urge to watch my back, but it turns out they aren't quite what I expected).
To be clear, I've met a handful that I think have been separated from their good judgment; I've met more that I'd class as eccentric. I've also met a handful of skilled researchers who still generally believe at least one eccentric thing, but make positive contributions in other areas. For how grounded they are, I see it as something of a bell curve there.
Here's the thing: I don't see their bell curve as so very different than any other group's bell curve. For Q-Anon, the far edge of the bell curve thinks that there are organized rings of pedophiles in D.C., Hollywood, the Roman Catholic church, and other places. For Republicans, the far edge of the bell curve may be the ones who imagine Antifa thugs around every corner; for Democrats it may be the ones who imagine white supremacists around every corner. I'm sure there are more candidates for the outlier beliefs, but I'm hoping the examples suffice to make the point: at the far edge of the bell curve, our fear and distrust can get the better of us, and we can imagine something as common without a lot of evidence for that belief. And the slightest evidence that the problem exists somewhere is magnified and distorted by that fear and distrust, until it becomes easy to believe the worst about people because we hate them, and hate them because we already believe the worst about them, in a self-reinforcing perspective-proof closed loop.
People are still generally more skeptical of Q-Anon than other groups, and to some extent I can understand that. I'm writing here to humanize them, though, so I will talk about one way in which I can relate. One main thread of the Q-Anon's is a deep distrust of the official narrative in the major media outlets. On that count I can sympathize for reasons I've discussed before and won't rehash now. Lots of people do not have a trusted voice that has enough power to speak for them effectively. That alienation can leave people susceptible, suggestible, depending on their temperament. From their point of view, a "conspiracy theory" is the belief that unethical people keep quiet about it. So every criminal activity that involved more than one person was also a conspiracy, and every unethical maneuver that involved more than one person was also a conspiracy. I've come across some Q-Anon'ers who have believed far more than proved; I've also seen a few who have done some commendable research on unearthing real-world situations of people who are doing unethical or illegal things and keeping quiet about it.
I write this in an effort to humanize the Q-Anon'ers, not just the ones who are good researchers but even the ones who are lost in a "sheep without a shepherd" kind of way. Who has never succumbed to the urge to believe the worst about their enemies? It's human. We don't need more ostracism; we need more connection. We don't need more blame; we need more empathy. And we certainly don't need a scapegoat; we need humility. Every time we say "those people" cannot be reached, evil laughs at getting a potential two-fer.
So if they come for Q-Anon, I will say something even though I am not a Q-Anon.
No comments:
Post a Comment