”Monsters do exist, but they are too few in number to be truly dangerous. More dangerous are the common men, those functionaries willing to think and to act without asking questions.“
–Primo Levi

”Paranoia is having all the facts“
–William Burroughs

Because I have a tendency to turn a normal conversation into a tempestuous discourse about world politics, trade agreements, and/or the sinister connotations of the plentiful number of shampoo choices at the drugstore, I have provoked the ire of many. I frolic merrily in the meadows of verbal trouble–making; I linger dangerously in the undulating hills of social banishment. However, I have discovered that during my long career as a hapless instigator, I have never unintentionally aroused more hot temper than concerning the issue of sports in the mainstream media.

Yes, it’s true. You can question a person’s politics, his economic preferences, his favourite tyrannical dictators (Suave Stalin? Marvellous Mao? Irresistible Idi?), or even his mother’s biryani, and he will calmly weather it all. But say one challenging word against sporting establishments such as the NHL, the NFL, or the Champions League, and by Gretzky’s stick, you’ve had it.

Once, I distinctly remember telling someone that televised sports are part and parcel of the entertainment monolith that seeks to distract people from the reality of the global situation. They say that the pen is mightier than the sword, but I really do believe that the television screen could blow them both out of the water faster than you could say ’Holy mind control Batman!’ Seen in this way, the NBA is really no different from Entertainment Tonight: both enterprises are highly successful in pumping us full of pointless facts (Britney Spears’ second marriage or Michael Jordan’s umpteenth retirement announcement) that have no direct effect on our lives. Well, you can imagine the uproar that caused: ”If you think that the NBA is run by the Freemasons, you’re totally crazy!“

I completely understand why the majority of people get defensive when the world of organized sports is called into question. It’s the one area where the public is given almost full disclosure, in terms of history, ownership, and motives, amongst other information. It is the one area that you feel is really yours, conversing for hours on end and sounding like an expert. Even I have to admit that such talk is, at times, impressive. It sounds cool: ”2–1…Kobe drops 45 for the double U!“ Nevertheless, I am of the opinion that playing the game itself would be more rewarding in terms of physical renewal than constantly talking about it. Can you imagine such zeal surrounding discussions on the Central American Free Trade Agreement or the detrimental effect of Export Processing zones on the infant economies of the Third World? I think not. It’s kind of hard to argue the fact that this stuff is distracting. The question is, then, is it distracting on purpose?

It is mildly irritating to be lumped into the ’crazy conspiracy theorist’ category; thrown in with the bitter hordes who blame America for everything, or the muttering, obsessive compulsives who hold Freemasonry as the fount of all evil. I’d rather be categorized as an over analytical, couch–jumping crazy, however, than be among the free citizenry who might as well walk around in ’In CNN We Trust’ bandanas.

Are the masses willing to turn a blind eye to the obvious bias and overt political agenda present in publications such as Time Magazine? I challenge people to whip out their red markers the next time they pick up an issue, and critically evaluate what they are reading. There are, of course, the standard articles about terrorists and homeland security and the stale justifications for war. Look closer, and one begins to see the surreptitious, seemingly ’by the way’ references to terrorism and the global ’Islamist’ threat in innocuous articles about cutting edge gardening implements. Is this unbiased, professional journalism or fear mongering for the promotion of an alternate political agenda?

People enjoy reading about Freemasonry, the interesting markings on dollar bills, countless ’conspiracy theories’, because they have all the titillating accouterments of mystery, of exclusivity, of being ’in’ on a great secret. One gets a sense of having discovered something, of being privy to confidential information, of standing out in the crowd of pitiless fools who aren’t aware of the significance of the pyramids on American currency. It does not help that we have a youth culture which fosters sensationalism and quick fixes, rather than one that would encourage sound reasoning, critical thinking, and the development of a sturdy intellect. Perhaps this would also explain the unfortunate proliferation of what I like to call ’The Wikipedia Happy School of Pseudo-Intellectualism.’ In a culture where it is ’cool’ to be calculatedly ’different’, there is a great irony in succumbing to the hyped up conspiracy theories propagated by the media itself, while largely ignoring the oncoming train that is hurtling directly at you. Conspiracy theories, it’s safe to say, are quickly becoming an industry unto themselves.

Which leads me to wonder: Am I really so far gone, that I now believe there is actually a conspiracy about conspiracy theories themselves? Is there such a thing as partial disclosure of facts that give a plausible half truth, and then a standard limited fallback, where wishy–washy admissions of error only serve to provide even more misinformation? Could the sloppier, more fantastic theories be pushed to the forefront, thereby causing more serious and credible investigative efforts to fall by the wayside?

These are some pretty heavy questions. You could brush them off as the neurotic preoccupations of an individual who thinks too much about thinking too much, or you could consider them for yourself. Do they really sound so unreasonable? In order to maintain the façade of a quasi–democratic society, it would be clever for governments to allow partial truths to circulate. It would be clever for governments to occasionally admit to ineptitude and crucify a few useless minion scapegoats along the way. It would be even cleverer to create a whole pop culture surrounding such conspiracy theories, with movies like ’The Manchurian Candidate’, ’Conspiracy Theory’, or ’The Skulls’ that help create a fictitious aura of movie magic. Essentially, the message is: Conspiracy theories have no basis in fact, you witless peasants! They are as real as Freddy Krueger! (Does the concept of such a movie monster become less unreal after one considers the grotesque serial killers that line the annals of American criminal history?)

Casting aside conspiracy theories as ’crazy talk’ is a nice way of discrediting what is uncomfortable to believe, or even to think about. Obviously alternative explanations aren’t one hundred percent factual, but the point is to at least consider the possibility of an alternative. And sadly, without a working knowledge of basic world history, these alternative possibilities begin to seem outlandish. FOX News can get away with absurdity after absurdity, simply because a lot of people have nothing else to reference. Would it have been easier to sell the calamitous war in Iraq if it was common knowledge that Saddam’s Ba’athist Party had been ushered into power by the CIA in the coup of February 1963? Would people have created more of an anti–war ruckus if they had known that the Ba’athists had come into power at the expense of the Iraqi Communist Party? Although it was a political party democratically elected by the Iraqi citizens themselves, it proved too much of a nuisance for the CIA. Would the simplistic war cries of ’Democracy!’ have been received with more skepticism if it was known how ambiguously American foreign policy treated such a concept? Why and how does the media then dare to imply that the Iraqi people have kindergartener–esque issues with the self-government?

As Mark Twain once observed, history doesn’t repeat itself, but sometimes it rhymes. And considering that Jay z is the standard for master lyricism amongst my peers, it sure looks to me like an awful epidemic of tone deafness around these parts. But then again, what do I know? I’m the conspiracy theorist nut–job.