What Changes to Abbie Richards’ Popular “Conspiracy Chart” Tell Us about Disinfo/Conspiracy Research

Abbie Richards’ “Conspiracy Chart” became popular in 2020. I featured it in my lengthy piece on conspiracy theories. The chart serves as a barometer, not just of contemporary conspiracy theories, but of the intentions and ideologies of disinfo researchers in general. Richards’ recent update of the chart (see below) is illustrative of the evolving beliefs and political convictions of many conspiracy researchers. Let’s look at a few of these telling changes (and retentions).

Beginning with the sidebar, it’s notable that the upper tier formerly read “World Ruled by Supreme ‘Shadow Elites.’ Once You Believe One You Usually Believe Most. Get Help.” The 2021 chart is changed to read “World Ruled by Supreme Shadow Elite. Promotes Hatred and Violence Towards Marginalized Groups.” (Here’s an Imgur link to a high-res side-by-side comparison of both charts.)

The shift from “Get Help” to “You’re a violent threat to society and marginalized groups” is significant.

Indeed, since the FBI identified QAnon as a potential domestic terror threat, much contemporary research now frames conspiracy beliefs as a violent threat to society. Believing in the Illuminati is no longer considered innocuous. In this way, exposing conspiracism and helping others escape its clutches becomes an intrinsic societal good, ennobling those who undertake this grueling effort. (Although, it is still unclear how belief in a Hollow Earth, Flat Earth, Nazis on the Moon, or Reptilian Overlords actually radicalizes believers towards violence.) Also, what is notably missing from such analysis is how Leftist ideologies have repeatedly led to violence (see: Weather Underground, Black Panthers, Antifa, Chaz, BLM riots, the shooting of GOP politicians by Bernie Sanders supporter, environmental terrorism, etc.). As we’ll see, conspiracy theories perpetuated by the Left are strangely absent from this list.

Moving to the upper tier (Tier 5), we notice that “Celebs moisturize with children’s foreskin” was removed from the highest level.” Why? Perhaps because it’s actually a thing? Either way, that removal has made way for significant new inclusions — “Hollywood is Turning Your Kids Gay” and “Trans Agenda.”

While Richards does not elaborate on these conspiracy claims, positioning them in the highest level of conspiracy paranoia is revealing. Especially when significant evidence exists that media is being used to indoctrinate our children. For example, Insider magazine noted “Animation’s queer women, trans, and nonbinary creatives are pushing gender boundaries in kid’s cartoons their counterparts couldn’t — or wouldn’t dare.” Then there was the creepy song released, and then deleted, by the San Francisco Gay men’s Choir declaring “We’re coming for your kids.” Here’s a sample verse and chorus:

You say we all lead lives you don’t respect. But you’re just frightened. You think that we’ll corrupt your kids if our agenda goes unchecked. Funny, just this once, you’re correct.

We’ll convert your children – happens bit by bit, quietly and subtly and you will barely notice it…

Furthermore, Abigail Shrier, in her devastating book, Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters, chronicles in detailed testimony how media, YouTube influencers, and academics push a grand pro-gay/trans narrative that is having disastrous effects upon our children. Also, Shrier’s book was actually banned by trans activists!

In his book Unjust: Social Justice and the Unmaking of America, Noah Rothman also notes the role pop culture plays in reshaping our children’s sexual identity.

“Popular culture is devoted to destigmatizing behavior in children that is atypical of their sex. We’re no longer talking about inculcating an interest in science and engineering in young girls or allowing boys to experiment with toys and costumes marketed toward girls, though both themes are prevalent in pop culture and advertising. What began as an effort to combat sexism and bigotry has reached the point that rejecting transgenderism even in grade school children is seen by many on the social justice left as narrow-mindedness.”

According to the Conspiracy Chart, Rothman would no doubt be considered “Detached from Reality.”

Being that LGBTQ-alliance and affirmation is so evidently pervasive in media and academia, why is it included in the most dangerous level of conspiracy thinking? The likely explanation is that, because such fears/concerns foment mostly on the Right, portraying Gay/Trans indoctrination as the highest level of dangerous conspiracy thinking conveniently indicts those with real concerns.

Which makes one wonder whether the Conspiracy Chart isn’t more of a tool to indict political opponents than actually trace conspiratorial thinking.

Changes to the next descending tier (Tier 4) are perhaps even more indicative of this political/ideological framing. New additions include:

• Antifa did Jan. 6th
• U.S. Presidential election was stolen
• Ivermectin cures COVID
• COVID is a bio-weapon
• Plandemic
• Vaccines have microchips

This tier received the most revision. Whereas the 2020 version included 11 “conspiracies” in Tier 4, the 2021 version has nearly doubled that, offering 21. “Anti-vaxxers,” which appeared in the first version, has given way to a broader range of pandemic-related issues — believing Ivermectin cures COVID, that the virus is a bioweapon, and Plandemic (the belief that COVID was intentionally released to initiate the Great Reset). In other words, anti-vaxxers, or those skeptical of the vaccine and the government’s handling of the pandemic, remain centrally targeted by the new Conspiracy Chart. Apparently, unless one receives the vaccine, encourages others to do so, and complies with State and Federal mandates regarding COVID protocols, they are framed as being “Dangerous to [themselves] and others” and nearing the dreaded conspiratorial point of no return.

Such conclusions are important in that the data regarding the origins and treatment of COVID still remain in flux. Evidence that the NIH funded gain-of-function research continues to emerge, casting questions upon the “experts” who have been debunking the “COVID-19 made in lab” charge. Newly released emails make more plausible the contention that Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins presided over the suppression of the lab-leak theory for political reasons. As Megan Basham recently wrote,

“…it doesn’t take any great level of spiritual discernment — just plain common sense — to look at the fact that Covid first emerged in a city with a virology institute that specializes in novel coronaviruses and realize it wasn’t an explanation that should be set aside too easily.”

Nevertheless, great effort has gone into denying the plausibility that the pandemic was the result of a lab leak. But why? Interestingly, the 2020 conspiracy chart included “COVID-19 made in a lab” in this 4th tier (see image). However, this “conspiracy” was removed from the 2021 version and replaced by the “COVID is a bio-weapon. ” Could this be an admission that the belief that COVID-19 was made in a lab was actually not as conspiratorial as initially projected? Furthermore, if there are legitimate questions as to the Chinese government’s transparency regarding the virus’ origins, how can anyone say with confidence that it was NOT designed as a bio-weapon?

But such confident pronunciations are indeed a feature of similar conspiracy research. Take the “Ivermectin cures COVID” claim. This belief is filed alongside “Biden is a robot” and “RFID tracking devices in bras.” But is the belief that Ivermectin is an effective treatment of COVID as deranged as the belief that President Biden is a robot? Apparently, some conspiracy researchers want you to believe so. Despite the fact that a large, peer-reviewed research study recently proved that ivermectin works, disinfo researchers appear determined to portray such beliefs — and its believers! — as delusionally lunatic hogwash that leads to violence.

Much more can be said about the new conspiracy chart and what it reveals about contemporary conspiracy research. Bottom line, Zuby was correct to observe that “Putting ‘trans agenda,’ ‘flat earth,’ ‘George Soros,’ ‘Holocaust Denial,’ etc. all in the same category is insane.”

Insane, but also intentional. Not only does Richards’ conspiracy chart conveniently ignore leftwing conspiracies, it groups conservative and rightwing-leaning beliefs with comically over-the-top crockery. Does anyone really think that concerns about “Cultural Marxism” are equivalent to believing in “Reptilian Overlords”? Apparently, today’s conspiracy researchers hope you do.

In his book “Conspiracy Theories: A Primer” Joseph Uscinski, associate professor of political science at the University of Miami, notes that when he began studying the subject he and his research partner noted that their colleagues had focused mainly on conspiracy theories believed by Republicans but ignored those on the Left.

They discovered a claim of “partisan asymmetry” — the belief that the Right believes way more conspiracy theories than does the Left — based on the pretense that “the right is more authoritarian, anti-intellectual and tribal.” They noted “the notion of asymmetry has persisted because academics and journalists align largely with the Left.”

This causes these institutions and researchers to “disproportionately dwell on conspiracy theories held by the right but overlook conspiracy theories closer to home… The cumulative effect is that our knowledge generating and knowledge disseminating institutions make the right look chock full of cranks and the left look sensible and savvy.” pgs. 92-93

Contemporary conspiracy research is a testament to “partisan asymmetry,” designed to “make the right look chock full of cranks and the left look sensible and savvy.” Abbie Richards’ “conspiracy chart” is Exhibit A.