Did a few decades ago. As other scholars have noted historians of medieval early modern europe used to view witchcraft and witch hunting as marginal aspects of the societies as they studied. Then they began to realize. That witch hunts revealed great insights into the cultures of the time. So similarly, a growing number of. Historians are realizing that an understanding of the history of Conspiracy Theory is central to understanding the current american political moment. Now, thats not to say that. The study of the history of american theory is new. In the 1960s, richard hofstadter, his landmark essay on the paranoid style in american politics, which was term for Conspiracy Theory. And historians like david bryant davis, gordon wood and Bernard Bailyn soon followed by showing the significance of conspiracies thinking in the American Revolution in early republic. Then, in the 1980s, Michael Rogan brilliantly in ronald reagan, the movie that what he called a counter tradition was, as he said at the core of american politics not its periphery beginning in the 1990s, though, there were fewer studies of Conspiracy Theory in u. S. History, and the subfield seemed pushed to the margins of the profession. But in the last decade, many historians have revived the study, the phenomenon. And we are currently living in a moment when it is becoming increasingly clear that understanding role of conspiracy theories in u. S. History is not just helpful interpreting the past, but also for providing lessons for how to challenge these theories in the present. So the four scholars here on this panel are part of this effort to understand the central unity of Conspiracy Theory to American History. All right. So let start here with our first panelist. Im going to introduce dr. Vaneesa cook, who received her ph. D. In u. S. History from the university of wisconsin, madison, in 2015 and has taught of a variety of history courses in the uw system. Her books socialists, religion and, the american left, was published in 2019 and has been recently released. Paperback from penn press. She currently serves as the historian for the missing in action project at uw madison. Vanessa, you. Thank very much. Welcome everybody. Now i am pretty new to this topic of conspiracy theories. So if i do seem woefully uninformed about them, thats accurate. My background is more my background is more in protest movements. Leftist radicalism throughout the 20th century and the history of socialism. But it me when i was reading through dr. Gan bones recently published book here on modern conspiracy theories how much many of seem to relate to an underlying fear of socialism and that and that really jumped out at me. So this talk will be about how i believe that many of these conspiracy theories throughout 20th century and into the 21st century into today may stem from that fear of socialism, particularly fears and conspiracy involving a secret totalite aryan authorities such as the deep state, highly centralized shadow government Controlling Society in the world, and concepts as one world government or new world order. Those kind of terms in, concepts that come up pretty in conspiracy theories throughout the 20th century and into today. So this of socialism in general, you know, not connected to conspiracy theories in particular, but a fear of socialism in general is a major thread of intellectual and cultural history in the past hundred plus years. And it does still continue to cause concern today. Just a of months ago or less than that, february three 2023 a congressional was proposed by members of the congress to denounce socialist ism and socialist policies. So this was just 2023, very recently, may recall. And it this resolution passed the house with republican support but also over 100 democrats also voted to denounce socialism and all socialist policy policies. Now, that may seem like a relic of the cold war era and that kind of thinking, but it just shows that this fear of socialism is still with to this day. Back in 1952, harry truman in the midst of the cold war, beginning of the cold war, said socialism, quote, socialism as a scare word that they have hurled every advance the people have made in the last 20 years. And it also a scare word for many progressive activists, many of whom ive and profiled in my work, who many them seem to shy away from it or, you know, not want to be associated with it because of the stigma and the scapegoating that was associated that term. So little bit overview as of, you know, versions of socialism existed the 1840, but it was really marx who popularized socialism with his writings in the midtolate 1800s and to to really break it down into its simplest terms, probably too simplified for the audience here. But marx argue that there were stages of history that would unfold over time. Different paradigm shifts, revolutions that would usher in a new stage of history. And he that the current stage of history was determined by the economic system, capitalist system at the time of his writing. But he argued that that would soon give way through a revolution or paradigm shift to the next stage which he called socialism in marked by characterize by a very strong, powerful centralized state authority that manage society economics, politics, to make things more equal and more efficient. Now, his end stage of history, he termed, and that was more what he believed would be a utopian type of society in which people would have learned to cooperate on their own for to promote equality, peace without that coercion from, a State Government. And so he believed that the State Government power and control eventually fade away as we transition into communist them. But it was really that argument about the the intermediary stage of socialism that concerned people and peaked peoples sense fear about that state authority and power. This all pretty theoretical and aspirational of course the bolshevik revolution world war one in russia that made this more of a reality. And put at least an experimental version of socialism on the national level. The bolshevik revolution was met by some optimism by, you know, groups of people, workers and intellectuals, but also stoked that fear among many people and and received a negative, pessimistic response for those who feared a threat to individualism and freedom subsequent eruptions of this fear and hysteria. In the 1920s, the first red scare a couple of decades later, the second red scare really resulted in a lot of blacklisting of People Associated with communism. Our fellow travelers and eruptions of violence, deportations, things of that. This continued over the course of the war and the cold war ended in the early 1990s. But just to get back to the point about conspiracy theories, i believe that many conspiracy theories that at first glance seemed to be unrelated to fear of socialism or communism actually had a deeper and engagement with it. So i can refer to agambens book here. One of the first major examples that he covers in the book is a Conspiracy Theory involving the protocols of the elders of zion, which a fictionalized manuscript supposedly written by a jewish oligarchy determined to establish kind of global dominance by the by this jewish oligarchy. And so people would quote from different passages from fabricated text that really didnt. But there were these conspiracies where it came from and how long it had been around. This really gained traction the 1920s in the United States in the midst of red scare, first red scare after world war one. So i dont think makes this point in the book, but for me it just seemed like this was an example or an early example of a one world government Conspiracy Theory or a new world order Conspiracy Theory. So a very early example of these terms that became more popular over time. So what is this one world government or new world Conspiracy Theory that i keep referring . Its a theory that there exists a secret cabal or of elites running world behind the scenes, unaccountable to the general masses or voters, and they seek to rule the world and replace nation state system and elected governments with their own authority. And furthermore these alleged authoritarians supposedly that history has been progressively in this direction to a global one world government over time. And so that was a very wordy definition, but thats basically the heart one world government or new world order, the secret, sometimes behind the scenes, sometimes developing gradually over time effort to have a nondemocratic, accountable oligarchy running things. I mentioned the first and second red scare bringing us up to the 1940s in the fifties. These of conspiracies also propagated by the John Birch Society in the mid 20th century and continuing on in the 1980s with books like garry allens none dare call conspiracy and, say no to the new world order, which came out in the mideighties. With the fall of the soviet union and the end of the cold war in the early 1990s. You think that a lot of these concerns and fears would subside, however, new world order conspiracy theories have found new life since the end of the cold war, especially with the rise of the internet communication, information and the sharing of conspiracy theories that have given them, like i said some increased of late, so in the nineties. For example, televangelist Pat Robertsons book. And in 1991 on the new world order uses that term in the title up to figures like sean hannity. Beck the fox news folks and alex jones into still using these terms. Alex jones in 22 and 2002 said quote, there is a tyrannical, organized nation calling itself the new world order, pushing for worldwide government. It is a cashless society, total and complete tyranny by centralized and socializing health care, the state becomes god basically when it comes to your health. And we basically get shoved into their system where human beings are absolutely worthless and quote. So, alex jones again using that kind of language and me, i think you can hear echoes of this fear of socialism in that language. Opposition to this marcus marxist and these stages of history moving towards a collectivist government government. In in that kind of language. Even theories that involve cover up. So anything from sandy hook as a cover up or cam trails or covid as a cover up i can also see some connections here with a fear of this one world government or new world order. If you have Something Like that a big cover up that requires a lot of people together to keep it going. I mean, its not hard. Imagine you would have to invent a secret Society Working behind the scenes to keep manufacturing that and duping the public. But these these theories hand in hand, again, with this new world order, one world government that i really believe stems from this ongoing fear of socialized them theories. Qanon as well that cambone does cover in the book. And if youre familiar with the intricacies and details of their theories, again you can see how the thread of those concepts come from these conspiracy theories of new world order, one world government, predating these more recent cover ups in time. So these conspiracies are no longer since the end of the cold war. A bipolar contest between two major powers, such as the u. S. And, the ussr. But they are a much larger battle between forces of centralization across the globe and those fighting to preserve small government nationalism and autonomy. And so and others, of course, drawing these battle lines. So to sum up, ironically perhaps im explaining current conspiracy with a Conspiracy Theory of my own and that that they often link back back to this deep seated fear of socialism and communism, which im maybe, you know, making that connection to simplified. But that is my argument today. And if we just come back to my opening example of the very recent congressional resolution against socialism, it may seem anachronistic or a throwback to cold war rhetoric, but in the context of these conspiracy, i think that a lot politicians are trying to pander to their constituency, hence who believe in these conspiracy theories, or theres still this fear among liberals. They dont want to be associated with these these concepts terms as well. Concerns about russia and russian interference have also persisted since the end of the cold war. And that will be the topic of my sean in his talk next. So thank you. All. Our second speaker is sean denniss. Hes an associate professor, the department of history, Political Science and ethnic studies at Long Beach City College and author of bowls markets chicagos, basketball, business and the new inequality. He is currently editing for publication a manuscript his late friend and colleague chris lamberti on the history of the 1919 chicago race riot. Hes in the initial phases of a book project on the history of scapegoating in the modern u. S. Sean. While im studying up, im going to replicate a practice in my undergrad courses to start presentation off with a joke because history is really depressing and its going to follow up on the nieces to did you know that a communist joke is not funny unless everybody gets it. All right. So actually, rather than talking about the history and the analysis of conspiracy theories as part of history, what i want to do today is actually about the analysis of conspiracy theories as part of historians performing their role as public intellectuals and. The way i want to do this is by talking about case of a very respected and wellregarded history. Heather richardson. How many of you know of Heather Cox Richardson . Okay. All right. All right. So what i want to talk about in this, in the way in which richardsons intellectual ism raises important questions, i think about our role as historians and talking about conspiracy is that are allegedly happening in current moment. So those of you that arent familiar with richardson, shes a bit of a ive actually more than bit of a star through her substack. For those of you that dont know what substack is, its like a direct writer to reader platform thats not mediated by a press or editor. So journalist, academic other writers use it. Hers is letters from an american and essentially the way that she builds it is offering an analysis of Current Events that is grounded in more thoughtful Historical Context than youll get reading newspapers or watching cable news. And in a recent New York Times profile on richardson one of the things they emphasized and she emphasizes this and im drawing on the bottom quote here is that shes offering something that you cant find in the Mainstream Media. That is, again, that Historical Context that doesnt necessarily exist when. Youre watching cnn and fox news or msnbc or even reading the New York Times. What im going to argue here is that richardson letters from american letters from an american, actually, a really interesting case study in how historians are participating in mass media commentary on allegedly current conspiracy during the trump era risk a range of intellectual missteps, including replicating the good versus evil Mainstream Media analysis that we see on conspiracy theories while also lending at a kind of scholarly or legitimacy. And i mean, something quite specific by good versus evil framework and talking about conspiracy theories. Its a framework where the legitimacy or validity Conspiracy Theory is not based on whether can empirically support it. Its based on whether it negatively implicates political opponents. Right. So if youre a democrat, a Conspiracy Theory is valid. If it sheds negative light on republicans and vice versa. And i think what were going to see is the way in which kind of wading this stuff in a current event context can take a very thoughtful and respectable scholar and them into this uncritical space of im on team democrat, therefore everything negative can possibly be said about my opponents is going to be grounded in my allegedly allegedly, historically contextualized blog and. The other thing that i think we see in this gets to the russian that that the russian interference theme that the nsa was alluding to is that. One of the things, by the way, you had to read through 6000 pages of this blog like i did over the past couple of months. One of the things youll find is the that it really reinforces the Mainstream Media notion that every problem that america faces economically and social is essentially imported from russia. Okay, so why focus on richardson . Of the reasons im actually focusing on richardson is because i actually genuinely respect her as a scholar. Im a Community College instructors talk about i teach lots of survey courses. I rely a lot on her work, particularly on the wounded massacre and political conspiracies. Surrounding that. So she actually has a very, very you know legit scholarly credentials. But importantly, its her reach. Her substack has become so popular that based on the best public data that we available to us, she has of thousands of subscribers and an on annual basis is earning about gross pretax at least 5 million from her substack a year. And you can see that it dwarfs in terms of revenue pretty much everything comes after its its orders of magnitude. The other thing talked about she she lends her credentials and, quotations and insights to a wide range of media outlets. This ranges from kind of antitrump right wing outlets or conservative outlets. The Lincoln Project to writing to for bill moyers to writing for more left wing outlets like jacobin. Getting profiled in the New York Times. Appearing pbs. Shes all over the place. Right. And i think that actually gives us