I’m currently reading Ian Wishart’s ‘The Paradise Conspiracy.’ Wishart is most well known today for being responsible for ‘Investigate Magazine’, which isn’t exactly the paragon of rational enquiry, but ‘in the day’ Wishart was a ‘respectable’ journalist. In the second of the two prologues to ‘The Paradise Conspiracy’ Wishart talks about how his career could be ruined by publishing what he knew about the European Pacific controversy. Being in a strangely conspiratorial mindset at the moment I immediately mused about one possible story to explain Wishart’s turn to extremism. The whole promoting ID and whatnot might be that by keeping himself in the limelight (so to speak) he can’t be so easily ‘done away with.’ Sure, he has to play the fool, but better a living fool than a dead purveyor of the truth…
Not that I’m saying that this is the case (or that I even think that this is even likely) but it’s the kind of story that fits the facts and looks explanatory.
Which, some days, seems to be the point of conspiracy theories. That my initial reaction to events is slowly becoming the academic postulation of connecting stories probably should worry me. This is the beginning of a process that turns a sports journalist into someone who believes that reptilian overloards have inflitrated the world government and eat babies in the bounds of Windsor Castle.
Yes, every day I fear that I am stepping a little closer to becoming one of ‘them.’