If you are a conservative the progressive left has certainly accused you of the heinous crime known as “othering,” but much like everything else, when a progressive accuses a conservative of doing or believing in something, it is they who are guilty of what they condemn.
For progressives the process of othering is really quite simple—draw a stark line in the sand over a social issue or behavior and then claim all who fall on the other side of the righteous progressive-left position is toxic, bigoted and racist.
Of course, the left will not own up to the “othering” they do, for which they are masters. The entire progressive project is based on “othering.” The slicing and dicing of society into identity groups is at its core a process of “othering.” And when one “others” someone, something or some belief it is then excluded from the pantheon of viable alternatives to the progressive project.
There’s more to be said on this topic in future columns, for now, let’s focus on one specific and treacherous example, and that is the use of the “conspiracy theory” label.
Over the weekend UBC’s board of governors chair Michael Korenberg (UBC is one of the largest universities in North America) resigned after it was revealed he liked a tweet by renowned conservative writer and documentary filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza.
In an article published by the National Post D’Souza was labeled as a “questionable far-right commentator” and a “conspiracy theorist.” Both of these labels are intended to “other.”
This is how National Post reporter Lynn Mitges frames the offense:
What Mitges purposely leaves out from D’Souza’s original tweet is the reference to the Democratic party. Here is the exact tweet in question.
The Democratic Party now has a paramilitary wing. Just like Mussolini. Just like Hitler https://t.co/VHCrAF4r9P
— Dinesh D’Souza (@DineshDSouza) June 14, 2020
The selective quoting in the National Post completely misstates the nature of D’Souza’s observation, which is that Black Lives Matter and Antifa are defacto paramilitary operations of the Democratic party. Just like Mussolini and Hitler had groups of streetfighters to do their bidding, so too does the Democratic party.
D’Souza is merely stating the obvious. He could have gone much further (as he has many times) and cleared up the confusion by accurately labeling BLM and Antifa as “fascist” paramilitary wings of the “fascist” progressive movement. As we know, progressives are the true fascists.
The ease in which the left assassinates character can only be likened to the ease in which the human body processes water.
It’s important to tackle the “conspiracy theory” label. It’s easy to see how labeling someone as a “conspiracy theorist” instantly “others.” The person and their ideas are immediately “exnominated” and considered to be well outside the bounds of acceptable discourse.
The challenge for conservatives is to shed any consideration of this label in the formulation of ideas and the manner in which they communicate those ideas to the public.
Worrying about being labeled a conspiracy theorist will impact your thinking—to the detriment of the conservative cause
Often, the conspiracy theory label is applied not to theories, but to observations of real-world eruptions of political violence that are painfully obvious for everyone to see. Such as the demands and tactics of domestic terrorist groups like BLM and Antifa, which are anathema to principles of justice and freedom. Both organizations ooze “wokeness,” advance Democratic party electoral chances and derive funding from the same sources that fund the majority of progressive causes.
When the obvious becomes plain to see the left relies on the “conspiracy theory” label to deflect public attention away from events and to compel the public to “don’t believe your lying eyes.” Leftist policies are not responsible for the rioting and violence in the streets and any suggestion to the contrary is just conspiracy theory.
At bottom, the conspiracy theory label affects the public more than the person charged with the offense. Why? Because it undermines an individual’s confidence in their own “conclusion-making.”
One of the most important goals of the left is to eradicate the enormous capacity of individuals to observe reality and then analyze and synthesize events with acquired knowledge and historical context. If allowed, the progressive project would fail, thus every tool is deployed to frustrate individual conclusion-making.
The process of conclusion-making is an innate human quality that hardens truth, promotes courage, and emboldens dissent: death for the progressive project.
