I find it hard to believe almost anything put out by the mainstream media today – at least on anything of substance. Covid exposed the fact that the govt and the media will routinely lie. In this podcast we look at some recent examples, and ask – how do we break free?
Alternatively, you can listen to the audio podcast.
Three conspiracy theorists walk into a bar…
you can’t tell me that’s just a coincidence.
When I was growing up, conspiracy theorists had a bad reputation. A conspiracy theorist was someone who usually had too much time on their hands and was obsessed with ‘out-there’ theories about what the shadowy elite pulling the strings were up to. In the intervening time, things have not changed: conspiracy theorists have as bad a reputation as they ever had.
However, that doesn’t seem to have made conspiracy theorists go away. In fact, their numbers seem to be growing. So much so that the BBC recently created a new post called a “disinformation correspondent”. Earlier this year she recorded a series called Marianna in Conspiracyland, looking at the rise of conspiracy theories. (As a side note, she was also caught lying on her CV – we may come back to that later).
I suspect most Christians don’t think much about conspiracy theories – not least because of the social stigma attached to conspiracy theorists. After all, who in their right mind would want to be associated with people who believe that lizards run the world, or that Bill Gates is using 5G to turn us all into robots?!…
All this will make what I am about to say sound crazy, but please bear with me. I am going to argue that Christians should be conspiracy theorists – or at least, should be prepared to believe conspiracy theories.
I suspect part of the reason people avoid conspiracy theories is because they don’t understand what a conspiracy theory actually is. They think it’s just something crazy which no-one sensible should go near. So, before we get into the Bible, I want to briefly look at the definition of a conspiracy theory.
A big part of the problem when talking about conspiracy theories and conspiracy theorists is the way that they are portrayed in the media. Conspiracy theories are either portrayed as extremely ‘out-there’ – such as being ruled by lizard men – or portrayed as believing there is a shadowy cabal of rich, powerful people pulling the strings in the background.
Both of these views of conspiracy theories have some truth in them: there are definitely some ‘out there’ theories which most people will probably find too extraordinary. And conspiracy theories, at heart, involve believing that we are not being told the whole truth – deliberately lied to, even – in order to further the interests of rich and powerful people.
So, Britannica defines a conspiracy theory like this:
Conspiracy theory, an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group. Such explanations reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events; indeed, the official version may be seen as further proof of the conspiracy.
Britannica, “Conspiracy theory”
This is a fairly standard definition. However, I believe that we need to think more deeply about it. Last year, PANDA wrote an article about Covid-19 called “Cockup or Conspiracy?”, which looked at the question of whether covid was a ‘conspiracy theory’. The article gives various pieces of evidence why covid needs to be examined in this way, but for our purposes the most interesting paragraph is this one about structural deep events:
Professor Peter Dale Scott (University of California, Berkley) developed the concept of the ‘structural deep event’ and this is useful in capturing the idea that powerful actors frequently work to instigate, exploit or exacerbate events in ways that enable substantive and long-lasting societal transformations. These frequently involve, according to Scott, a combination of legal and illegal activity implicating both legitimate and public-facing political structures as well as covert or hidden parts of government – the so-called deep state which is understood as the interface ‘between the public, the constitutionally established state, and the deep forces behind it of wealth, power, and violence outside the government’. So, for example, Scott argues that the JFK assassination became an event that enabled the maintenance of the Cold War whilst the 9/11 crimes likewise enabled the global ‘war on terror’, and that both involved a variety of actors not usually recognized in mainstream or official accounts of these events. It is important to note that Scott claims his approach does not necessarily imply a simplistic grand conspiracy, but is rather based on the idea of opaque networks of powerful and influential groups whose interests converge, at points, and who act to either instigate or exploit events in order to pursue their objectives. [My emphasis]
I think this is a very helpful way to think about conspiracy theories. Most of us find it hard to imagine a secret, shadowy cabal of the rich and powerful gathering together to plan terrible things so they can further their own agenda. Let’s face it, the level of organisation required would be phenomenal! How could they get away with it – without anyone finding out? If that is a conspiracy theory, then I agree – it’s hard to see how that could be true.
However, as the article points says, if by ‘conspiracy theory’ you are talking about opaque networks of powerful and influential groups whose interests converge, who can act together to instigate or exploit events – then you are dealing with something much more realistic and believable. Given this definition, I would say that ‘conspiracy theories’ are not beyond the realm of imagination.
There’s much more that could be said, but this is supposed to be a post about Christians and conspiracy theories, so let’s get to looking at the Bible.
One spiritual practice which I have adopted over the last few years – and which I recommend to everyone – is to read a Psalm every day, alongside your daily Bible reading. The Psalms are wonderful, and they help to embed the truths that we learn in other parts of the Bible. The Psalms are about spiritual and moral formation – helping us to learn to love God, to pray to him, and to learn his ways.
What’s interesting to me about the Psalms is how much they talk about truth. Psalm 15 is a typical example:
Lord, who may dwell in your sacred tent?
Who may live on your holy mountain?The one whose walk is blameless,
Psalm 15:1-3
who does what is righteous,
who speaks the truth from their heart;
whose tongue utters no slander,
who does no wrong to a neighbour,
and casts no slur on others;
You could multiply examples like this throughout the Psalms, not to mention many other parts of Scripture. I think Psalm 15 is particularly helpful, though, because it teaches us two things about the truth. Firstly, we should “speak the truth from our heart”. If we love other people, we should speak the truth (as Paul puts it, “speaking the truth in love”, Ephesians 4:15). I love what the economist Thomas Sowell says about truth:
Sowell is absolutely correct. If we truly care about other people, we need to speak the truth. We know that God “does not lie” (Titus 1:2), and we need to be like him – in contrast to Satan, who is the “father of lies” (John 8:44). The only thing we should care about is whether something is true or not, not whether it is a ‘conspiracy theory’ or not.
The second thing we learn from Psalm 15 is that Christians should not cast a slur or slander on others. That means we should not only speak the truth in general, we should also avoid speaking a lie – especially when it is a lie against someone else. To put it into today’s language, we mustn’t blacken someone’s name or drag their reputation through the mud.
Let me emphasise again how seriously God takes the truth. I will quote here from the Heidelberg Catechism, answer to Q #112, “What is required in the ninth commandment?”
I must not give false testimony against anyone, twist no one’s words, not gossip or slander, nor condemn or join in condemning anyone rashly and unheard. Rather, I must avoid all lying and deceit as the devil’s own works, under penalty of God’s heavy wrath. In court and everywhere else, I must love the truth, speak and confess it honestly, and do what I can to defend and promote my neighbour’s honour and reputation.
Source
How is this relevant to conspiracy theories? Two ways. Firstly, some ‘conspiracy theories’ are actually based on eyewitness testimony. We’ll come back to this at the end, but let me quote you from the end of the Corbett Report documentary on 9/11 whistleblowers:
What is especially galling when the so-called “skeptics” use the “someone would have talked” fallacy is that the whistleblowers have in fact done everything possible to publicize their stories—holding press conferences, filing formal appeals, joining whistleblower organizations, and making themselves available for interviews. For their heroic efforts, these brave men and women have been fired from their jobs, shunned by former colleagues, smeared by the mainstream media, and ignored by the public.
If we dismiss people – especially eyewitnesses – without hearing them, that is effectively calling them liars. If we do this casually, are we not guilty of bearing false witness against them?
Secondly, going back to what I said at the start, the label ‘conspiracy theory’ or ‘conspiracy theorist’ can be hugely damaging. If something is a conspiracy theory, it can be dismissed and need not be engaged with. Likewise, if someone is a conspiracy theorist, they can be dismissed and cast aside. Christians of all people should beware of slandering their neighbours. It is literally one of the Ten Commandments!
By all means disagree with someone, by all means debate and make them prove their point. But we must not dismiss people by labelling them as ‘conspiracy theorists’, or indeed any other demeaning and belittling terms.
I don’t like to bring my own experience into this, but I think it’s important to say I know how much this kind of thing hurts. When covid hit, within a few weeks I started coming to the conclusion that the lockdowns were a tremendous blunder. I spoke out about it publicly on social media and online. Three years on, myself and many others who raised the alarm are being vindicated by the day. It seems that not a day goes by without another newspaper article talking about the catastrophic and unnecessary effect of lockdowns. But, when I spoke out at the time, I got huge pushback. One person even sent me a private Facebook message and said that I was a bad Christian for speaking out.
There are people who haven’t spoken to me recently, people who I would have considered friends, because of my views. (Or at least, I suspect it’s because of my views, I think most people avoid me without saying why.) This is simply not an acceptable way for Christians to behave.
Christians of all people should be aware of the tendency of the human heart towards evil. As far back as the book of Genesis, we read:
The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time.
Genesis 6:5
Paul assembles a litany of quotations in Romans 3 about the wickedness of humanity:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
Romans 3:10-18
there is no one who understands;
there is no one who seeks God.
All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”
“Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”
“Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
“Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery mark their ways,
and the way of peace they do not know.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”
As it says – “their tongues practice deceit”. The fact that people do not believe or speak the truth is highlighted.
There are many instances in the Bible of people who refused to believe in the truth. One such example is the Pharisees. In Matthew 21:23-27, they come to Jesus to question his authority. Jesus tells them he will answer if they answer his question: “Was John’s baptism from heaven, or of human origin?” The Pharisees discuss it and refuse to answer – they know they are trapped: they can’t say it was of human origin because they were scared of the people; but they can’t say it was of divine origin because Jesus could turn around and ask why they didn’t believe him. What’s interesting for our purposes is that they didn’t consider what was true or not. They didn’t think about which possibility was true – they were only interested in what was politically expedient.
We know that human beings are made in the image of God, but we also know that human beings are fallen. In the succinct phrase of the prophet, “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” (Jeremiah 17:9). We also know that the closer people are to power and wealth, the greater the temptation will be to act in a sinful and godless way. Lord Acton famously said:
Too often I think people are unwilling to investigate ‘conspiracy theories’ because they don’t believe that people could be so wicked – especially not in the Western world. I believe that Christians should be able to rise above this: we should not have a rose-tinted view of the human heart. Is that not why democracy was invented in the first place – so that power could be held accountable? So, why should we think that – even in a democratic country – our leaders are immune from the influence of evil?
Think about this question: who does it benefit to demonise ‘conspiracy theorists’? It seems to me that it’s a rather ingenious way for the rich and powerful to avoid having to answer tough questions.
Psalm 2 begins like this:
Why do the nations conspire
Psalm 2:1
and the peoples plot in vain?
The word ‘conspire’ means to come together or ‘throng’. It is used four times in the Old Testament, once here and then three times in Daniel 6 (which is in Aramaic – it’s the Aramaic equivalent of the Hebrew word) – where Darius’ officials conspire against Daniel. This is the same pattern that we find throughout the Scriptures, where the rulers of the earth band together for wicked purposes (e.g. Revelation 16:14). We know that, when men get together, persecution of Christians tends to follow. That is nothing more than what the Bible predicts will happen.
At the very least, Christians should be aware that powers and authorities can misuse their authority – and that includes controlling what people believe is true. Dismissing ideas as ‘conspiracy theories’ without properly investigating them is to side with the rich and powerful. This is, again, not something that God approves of. It is not wrong to recognise the power dynamics involved in the media and the authorities – powerful people can use their power to their own advantage. I think Western Christians are far too often naive about this.
Something which only struck me recently about the resurrection account is the way that the Jewish leaders spread an ‘official narrative’ about Jesus’ resurrection:
While the women were on their way, some of the guards went into the city and reported to the chief priests everything that had happened. When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.
Matthew 28:11-15
There was an official story about the resurrection, which was circulated by the Jewish authorities. However, it was not the truth! There were many eyewitnesses who saw Jesus alive (see e.g. Luke 1:2, 2 Peter 1:16, 1 Corinthians 15:3-8 etc).
Christians do not believe the ‘official story’ about Jesus: we believe the eyewitnesses, that Jesus has been raised from the dead. If we are prepared to stand firmly on the resurrection, even if it means being outsiders amongst our friends and family, surely it’s not too much to ask to stand on the truth in lesser ways? If we’re willing to embrace the label of “Christian” – and all the shame it carries with it – are we not also willing to bear the label of “conspiracy theorist”, so long as we are standing on the truth?
Please don’t misunderstand me here: I’m not trying to say that Christians should be gullible, and believe any and every conspiracy theory going! My point is that we should be prepared to listen to people who are critical of the mainstream narrative. Especially people who are eyewitnesses, and people who are prepared to speak out at significant personal cost – reputational damage, career prospects etc.
Let me give you a couple of examples to close with.
At the end of the day, few things are more important than the truth. The church is the the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15). All truth is God’s truth. If we commit ourselves to seeking the truth in every aspect of life, not just the truth of Scripture but the truth of the world, then we will be doing what is right.
This podcast looks at the importance of telling the truth, and how lies hollow out people and institutions. Riffing on Tucker Carlson’s speech I mentioned last week.
Alternatively, check out the audio podcast.
Does love require truth? In this podcast we look at the relation of love and truth, starting with a quote from Katharine Birbalsingh and Thomas Sowell.
The audio podcast is available here.
In this podcast we look at the problem with “misinformation”, especially with Big Tech censorship, and how to address this issue from a Christian perspective.
Over the last 15 months we’ve got used to the sight of social media fact-checkers. But are they impartial and unbiased? And is there a deeper problem going on in the field of science?
Solzhenitsyn wrote the essay “Live not by lies” in 1974. Although it was written in the context of the Soviet Russia, I believe it still speaks to us today. The truth is what sets us free.
In my previous post I looked at the Biblical principles of safety. In this post we’re going to look at another principle which is very relevant to the current situation: truth. I want to outline a few Biblical principles for truth, and then if there’s space at the end talk a little about how we’re doing with the current situation.
I’ve just been reading the Francis Schaeffer Trilogy. In the first book, “The God who is there”, Schaeffer basically says that the whole concept of truth depends on God’s existence. If God doesn’t exist, anything goes: we can’t trust our senses, we can’t trust our intellects – eliminating God ultimately undermines any basis we have for rationality. On the other hand, if God does exist, that is the God of the Bible, then truth exists: he created the universe in this way and not that way. He gave us minds and he wants us to use them. The ultimate foundation of all truth in the universe is God.
As a side note – I wrote a post on Understand the Bible last week: Why you should read Schaeffer – True Spirituality. If you’ve never read his writings, they’re well worth reading.
The whole scientific method ultimately depends on God’s existence. This is why science flourished in a Western, Christian society – and many of the early scientists were Christians. Science requires a belief that there is a world out there and that we can discover something true about it. Only God, the Christian God, can provide the foundation of that belief. (If you’d like to know more about that, check out Part One of the session I posted last week about Genesis and Science).
The fundamental, take-away point here is that (to borrow from the X-Files) the truth is out there. It’s never pointless to try to find out the truth. The truth is not political, or determined by those who have the most power. It’s out there, and we can discover it. And, what’s more, it is the truth whether or not people believe it or not. My daughters like to listen to an artist called Colin Buchanan, and his song Truth is still true says truth is still true even if you don’t believe it. This is fundamental to science.
God is not just the fount of truth, he is also truthful. That means he is truthful in what he says. You can see this many places in the Bible. For example, Titus 1:2 talks about God “who does not lie”. One of the conditions for testing whether a prophet was truly from God or not was whether what they prophesied came true or not (Deuteronomy 18:22). The Psalms often associate God with truth, e.g. his laws are true (Psalm 119:142).
Jesus himself said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31-32). Jesus claimed to be the truth (John 14:6), and that anyone who followed him would be living in the truth which brings freedom.
So God is not just the foundation stone of truth, but he speaks truth to us. When we listen to God, we listen to the truth. In particular, this means that the Bible is true and trustworthy: when we listen to the Bible, we are listening to God’s words – words which are true.
“You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.”
John 8:44
If God is the foundation of truth and always truthful, by contrast Satan is the Father of lies. It is, in fact, his “native language”. You can see that from the beginning – when he deceived Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden (Genesis chapter 3).
God is truth, anything less than the truth does not come from him but from the evil one. I think it’s important to make the point that there are forces of evil out there who are seeking to lie and suppress the truth. Romans 1:18 says we human beings “suppress the truth” – we don’t want to know the truth about God, so we suppress it. We exchange the truth about God for a lie (Romans 1:25).
Whenever truth is honoured in a society, God is honoured, because God is truth. Jesus said “Everyone on the side of truth listens to me” (John 18:37). Whenever truth is not honoured in a society, it is not God who is honoured but Satan.
Because God is truthful, Christians should also be concerned with the truth. I like to read a Psalm every day, and recently I’ve been struck by how many of them speak of our truthfulness. For example, Psalm 52:3 says of wicked people: “You love evil rather than good, falsehood rather than speaking the truth.” By contrast, Psalm 15 says that God loves someone of integrity, who “speaks the truth from their heart”.
When God rebukes the people of Israel through Jeremiah, he says “Friend deceives friend, and no one speaks the truth. They have taught their tongues to lie; they weary themselves with sinning.” (Jeremiah 9:5). The people routinely lying to each other was evidence of how depraved they had become. The people of God are to be different – Ephesians 4:15 says we should speak the truth in love to one another.
The ninth commandment forbids us from bearing false witness against our neighbour. This is how the Heidelberg Catechism interprets it:
I must not give false testimony against anyone, twist no one’s words, not gossip or slander, nor condemn or join in condemning anyone rashly and unheard. Rather, I must avoid all lying and deceit as the devil’s own works, under penalty of God’s heavy wrath. In court and everywhere else, I must love the truth, speak and confess it honestly, and do what I can to defend and promote my neighbour’s honour and reputation.
If you’re interested in learning more, you might enjoy the Understand the Bible session on Commandment #9 here.
Those who fear the Lord, who know that what he says is truth, should be concerned about truth – not just the Bible, but all truth. All truth is God’s truth. There is no sacred / secular divide when it comes to truth – if something is true, then it is God’s truth. We should stand up for and defend the truth wherever it is necessary.
The final point I want to make is that truth is not always welcome. As Jesus said in John 8:45, “Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me!” Because truth is godly, there will always be ungodly people who want to lie or distort the truth. The truth can be hard for us to hear.
This is why Proverbs 27:6 says, “Wounds from a friend can be trusted, but an enemy multiplies kisses.” The path of wisdom is recognising that sometimes telling the truth wounds us – yet it is good for us. This is why we should trust and appreciate friends who love us enough to tell us the truth. People who want to manipulate us will never tell us the truth. They will only ever want to tell us what we want to hear. The people who love us enough to tell the truth should be prized.
This doesn’t mean we should seek to be offensive in telling the truth! It’s possible to tell the truth in a nasty way. The film The Invention of Lying is interesting about that – just because something is true doesn’t mean you have to just come out with it! If the truth is going to be offensive, we might as well try to make sure that it’s the truth causing the offence, not the way that we say it.
One of the interesting things about the covid-19 situation is the way that truth has become politicised in the extreme. I wrote a little about this in my previous post about political truth. Let me expand on that a little.
Whenever I post up something on Facebook which is from a more ‘lockdown sceptical’ perspective (the whole fact that there are sides to begin with is a bad sign), it usually gets jumped on. The thing is, most of the time people don’t respond to the actual scientific or logical points being made. Instead, people often focus on the people. (In football speak, the play the man – not the ball).
For example, a few weeks ago in a discussion someone pointed me to this piece on the Byline Times. It largely focusses on the politics of people who question the science of lockdowns. There are very few facts or logical arguments. So, for example, Carl Heneghan and the Oxford University Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine come under fire because it receives money from a close Trump supporter. Karol Sikora, who has been outspoken about the lockdowns, comes under fire not because of science but because he has campaigned for conservative political issues.
Social media “fact-checkers” have got in on the act. For example, Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson’s piece (they are both from the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine) has been labelled as “false information”. Even though I don’t find any false information in it! And scientists who question the lockdown have received some horrendous abuse online, for example Sunetra Gupta (one of the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration).
It is as if truth no longer matters – the only thing that matters is agreeing with the establishment.
A recent editorial in the BMJ (the British Medical Journal – a prestigious medical journal) said: “When good science is suppressed by the medical-political complex, people die”. This is why the truth matters, especially with covid. The stakes are too high – it is literally people’s lives. But not just people who are dying from covid, but all the other factors e.g. the mental health cost of lockdown as well as the people who have died (or will die) due to not receiving the treatment the need. I talked about this in my post about the risk of lockdown.
The stakes are high for any course of action we take. Which is why it is so important that we base our decisions on the truth. The truth IS out there when it comes to covid. Christians especially have a duty to expose and live by the truth, even when it is swimming against the tide in our society.
Proclaiming Christ the truth must mean that we are concerned with truth everywhere – not just ‘gospel’ truth or Biblical truth but truth in the world as well. And, if we seek the truth, perhaps people will listen:
“the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.”
John 18:37
I didn’t want to go into too much detail in my post about issues around the truth and covid. It’s easy to get bogged down. My problem is that there is so little truth in this whole situation. Let me give a few pointers, you could just go on and on about this. I suggest Toby Young’s website Lockdown Sceptics for a starting point.
Why is so much of the government’s response reliant on PCR tests? We know there are problems with the tests – for example, there is a false positive rate. There are also problems with tests being run by people with very little training. See, for example, the recent Channel 4 Dispatches programme about covid testing. In other words, when a test comes back positive, if the person in question has no symptoms, how do we know it’s a “case”? Dr John Lee wrote about this back in October. Here’s a good video from Dr Clare Craig talking about the problem with testing:
How can we be confident that the number of covid deaths is accurate? A covid death is currently defined as someone dying within 28 days of a positive test. Regardless of whether the cause of death was actually covid or not. I have personally heard of two stories from people I know (clergy) who have done funerals recently: one died of a heart attack, one of a road traffic accident. Both of these were listed as covid deaths – even though covid had nothing to do with the cause of death. From what I hear on social media, this kind of thing is happening enough to get noticed. Why are we not actually looking at people who are actually ill? The ZOE app from Kings College London, for example, tracks people with actual symptoms rather than just test results. That tells a somewhat different story.
Why are the official statistics unclear? Just this morning I read an interesting thread about excess non-covid deaths. Why are these not being picked up on? And why do the government rarely ever put deaths in context, e.g. comparing the number of actual deaths against the number we usually expect at this time of year?
Do lockdowns have any positive effect at all? There are lots of scientific studies on lockdowns now, and they show that lockdowns make little (if any) difference to mortality, and they have huge harmful effects. Ivor Cummins has a summary on his website. (Check out the rest of his YouTube channel for lots of analysis of the data).
You could carry on and on. So much of what most people seem to believe about covid is scientifically disputable, or at least, more complicated than what we are led to believe.
Please don’t misunderstand me here. I’m not trying to say the very existence of all these opinions makes them right. However, as I said, the stakes here are too high. Why are these things not being discussed or addressed by the government? Why does the establishment narrative not get questioned with the rigor it deserves? As the BMJ said, when truth is suppressed, when it becomes political, then people die. I want to seek the truth wherever it lies, not whatever is politically convenient.
I had another one of my epiphanies yesterday. As I was chatting to my wife, something became clear to me which I hadn’t really seen clearly before. That is: there are now two kinds of truth in the world – political truth and actual truth. They’re not the same thing at all. To some extent there’s always been political truth, but it’s been getting worse over the last few years and covid has put it into overdrive.
Let’s start by thinking about what political truth is.
The first mark of political truth is that it is general held by the establishment. I think ‘the establishment’ is quite a hard thing to define, so let me try to give a few examples:
The establishment are the people who are generally the movers and shakers in a society: they’re the people who run the country, manage companies, and so on. The fact that it’s difficult to define precisely doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist!
Political truth has got a love/hate relationship with the facts. It loves facts which support it; it tends to gloss over facts which contradict it. In general, political truth only looks at a subset of the facts and evidence available – it cherry picks.
Political truth is narrative – a story which is constructed from facts and evidence, but is more than that. It’s the ‘bigger picture’. But the problem is that the bigger picture does not necessarily reflect the actual data. The bigger picture in fact has been chosen for political reasons, rather than because it relates to the data.
Political truth cannot be questioned. Not seriously, anyway. If you dare to question political truth, you could end up being cancelled or losing your job. At the very least, no-one will really take you seriously if you question it. We’ll look at a few examples of this in the next section.
The point is that the establishment see it as their job to police conformity to political truth. If a member of the establishment questions political truth, they risk losing their place as part of the establishment.
This doesn’t just apply in government or the mainstream media – I think it trickles down into society as well. There are certain opinions which are difficult to question on social media – mainly those opinions which question political truth.
One of the most interesting things I’ve found with political truth is that people who question is will be cast as outsiders. Sometimes they’ll be called “far-right”. Sometimes their academic credentials will be called into question. In general, someone who questions political truth will be labelled as a terrible person, beyond the pale. Their arguments won’t be considered – it will just be a character assassination.
So – political truth will be defended by labelling anyone who questions it as with an unfair association.
The final thing to say about political truth is that it’s a view which is held primarily by the establishment. The working classes generally hold a view which is closer to actual truth.
One of George Orwell’s most famous books is his dystopian novel, 1984. The book is about a future where the government control what truth is, through the Ministry of Truth. This is what Wikipedia has to say about it:
As well as administering “truth”, the ministry spreads a new language amongst the populace called Newspeak, in which, for example, “truth” is understood to mean statements like 2 + 2 = 5 when the situation warrants. In keeping with the concept of doublethink, the ministry is thus aptly named in that it creates/manufactures “truth” in the Newspeak sense of the word. The book describes the doctoring of historical records to show a government-approved version of events.
The government manufactures and determines the truth. In Orwell’s novel this was a dystopian future – but it looks a bit like what is happening now!
I’m going to look at three brief examples. These are all things which I’ve written about on this blog before.
One thing which the establishment seems to believe at the moment is that men can become women and women can become men. Even to the point of changing your birth certificate. Don’t believe me? The UK Government guidance explains, “you will also be able to obtain a new birth certificate showing your recognised legal gender.”
So the UK Government believe that it is actually possible to change your sex, to the point where they will issue you a new birth certificate. This has been the case since 2004, when the Gender Recognition Act came into being. Over the last few years it’s become contested as more and more young people are being encouraged to transition. I wrote about this four years ago, and things haven’t changed much since then.
I believe we can see all five elements of political truth at play when it comes to transgender ideology:
Now, fortunately I think actual truth is beginning to reassert itself. Some high profile people have begun to question the narrative. But there is still a long way to go.
I don’t want to open a can of worms here! This isn’t about trying to take a side on Brexit. But it is fairly obvious to me that there is an establishment view of Brexit. It goes something like this: “Brexit is a disaster. It was only voted for because low-information idiots saw a misleading slogan on the side of a bus. And it was only voted for by racists. Any right-thinking person should support the EU.”
I wrote about this also back in 2016. It’s not about the rights and wrongs of leaving the EU – it’s about the narrative which is constructed about Brexiteers.
And again, I think we can see all five elements of political truth with the establishment’s position on Brexit. Things are changing a little: since the Conservatives won a comprehensive majority a year ago on the promise “let’s get Brexit done”, I think attitudes have changed a little. But, again, there’s still a long way to go.
A few years ago I wrote a piece about Islam. There I lamented the fact that most politicians know virtually nothing about religion. They just think all religions are basically the same.
This has a massive impact – for example, just a few months ago I wrote about Dr Ella Hill, a grooming gang survivor. She, and many other young women, found the police overlooked rape and other horrible things because they didn’t want to appear racist. The police would prefer to observe political truth rather than deal with actual truth.
Just a few weeks ago, a French teacher was beheaded by an Islamist extremist. Has there been much of an outcry about this from the establishment? No. It doesn’t fit with political truth, so it’s sidelined and forgotten.
One of the things I’ve found striking about the coronavirus situation is the fact that it does seem to hit all the marks of political truth.
Of course! The government and most of the mainstream media (especially the BBC) have portrayed covid-19 in a particular light. There is an established line on the coronavirus, which goes something like this: it’s a disease which is so dangerous that, if we let it run wild, it will overload our health system and cause thousands of deaths.
There’s a lot of disagreement about the truth when it comes to covid-19. But you wouldn’t know that by listening to most of the establishment voices! They’re so keen to promote a particular view that even the UK Office for Statistics Regulation had to give them a slap on the wrist for the graph presented a few weeks ago.
Neil Ferguson’s original model (which the government based their decision to lockdown on back in March) has been shown to have many flaws and is “fundamentally unreliable”. Various scientific studies have shown little-to-no benefits of lockdown. There are many scientists who question the lockdown strategy, for example supporters of the Great Barrington Declaration.
The fact that there are voices contrary to the establishment view doesn’t mean that they are correct. But it does seem to me that upholders of political truth have an agenda which is not to find the actual truth, but rather to punish those who question political truth.
How many MPs have spoken out against the lockdown? How many pieces have you read in the mainstream media which bring up the some of the points I mentioned above? On my own personal Facebook page, whenever I post up anything about the lockdown there is always some kind of backlash.
Fortunately I think there are a number of papers who are questioning the establishment view. Things are beginning to change.
If you do question the lockdown, you will be labelled. It might be as a “lockdown denier” or “covid denier”, or maybe “granny killer”. Earlier on today I read an article on UnHerd, The trouble with ‘Covid denialism’. What’s interesting about this piece is that it explicitly sets up Michael Yeadon as a ‘denier’, before going on to set him straight.
This is how it always works: “No, you’re wrong. Let me give you the proper facts.” I can’t really comment on the actual points made – that would take someone who knows more of the data than I do. I’d like to see them talk it out and debate these points. To my mind the problem is more the whole framing of the debate as “us vs them”: we are the reasonable people, you are the denier. It’s not intending to get to the truth, it’s intending to set someone straight.
It’s actually a kind of heresy hunting, like the inquisition.
Polls show consistently that people approve of the lockdown measures. I don’t know where the pollsters are finding these people, because the people I talk to often have a different view. (Maybe part of the problem is the questions you ask – as Yes Prime Minister explains!) I think a lot of people, even those who are concerned about covid, just want to get back to some kind of normality. A lot of people want to get back to jobs, families and friends, doing the things we used to do.
“Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.“
John 18:37
Christians should have a commitment to the truth. The ninth commandment forbids us from bearing false testimony against our neighbour. Titus 1:2 states that God “cannot lie”. Jesus said that he himself is the truth (John 14:6), and that anyone on the side of truth should listen to him. By contrast, the world “suppresses the truth” (Romans 1:18).
I believe it is the duty of every Christian to stand up for the truth – the actual truth, not political truth. We should not simply be content to stand by and let political truth go unchecked. I believe we should challenge where necessary.
This doesn’t mean that we should simply be contrarians – contradicting the establishment view just for the sake of it! But, in a world where truth is not valued as it should be, I believe it is our duty to stand up for it.
Where the world does not value truth, we should value it. Even if it costs us personally. We should seek it – because when we are seeking the truth, we are seeking God. Our God is a God of truth, and the Spirit of truth lives in us. Let’s pray for God’s wisdom in challenging political truth and telling the actual truth.