These numbers are indeed troubling. However, the actual prevalence of each conspiracy belief in the population is likely lower for a couple of reasons.
1) Positivity bias - people are more likely to select agree/support responses than disagree/oppose responses.
2) Expressive responding - People who display high distrust of the government and social institutions may not place any stock in a particular conspiracy theory asked about on a survey, but wouldn't put it past institutional actors to do something messed up, especially if it's in their interest.
3) Inattention - Some respondents will select the "agree" option just because they are breezing through the survey.
However, even if these percentages are likely overestimates of actual beliefs, they are still alarming. They show that it doesn't take a ton of prodding to get high percentages of people to believe these conspiracy theories and act on their implications.
It's good that you ask these questions. It lets everyone know where the country stands. I disagree with all of these conspiracy theory's. The major problem now to quote former USA President Bill Clinton "it's the economy stupid"
I have to take issue with some of the wording, as a PhD in politics. Let's look at the WEF. I read the question and thought, well, yes they have a strategy but, no, they are not secretive at all, they have been very clear they seek to influence. But is influence the same as imposition, and does the distinction matter given what Trudeau and Freeland have said about the organization? On this basis, I'm not sure how I would have answered - yes (thus I'm a knuckle dragger) or no (I'm suddenly reasonable) - it might have depended on my mood that day. Either way, there is lots of space to criticize the organizers of the WEF. Yet the article proceeds under the guise that criticism of global elites is practically tantamount to conspiracy. I don't think so. Whereas the idea that all events are 'controlled' by a small group of people is indeed conspiracy, there is way too much grey area in the wording if I could have reasonably answered yes to the WEF question without actually believing in any conspiracy. The elites today have lost touch, they lack empathy for the workers of the world - to coin a phrase - and we have democratic institutions to check power. Wanting those institutions to work vis-à-vis elites cannot be confused with conspiracy. Thus, I don't think the analysis based on the data is very helpful and only feeds into the narrative that people who hold different viewpoints from the norm, or who are not experts in a topic and express themselves crassly, can be easily dismissed. No.
These survey responses are intriguing but should be followed up by asking more precise questions.
For instance, consider the assumption that 37% of Canadians agree that “there is a group of people in the country who are trying to replace native-born Canadians with immigrants who agree with their political views.”
This is said to be an articulation of what is commonly referred to as replacement theory., which is attributed to the right wing.
However, as a left winger I could easily agree with this statement. Recall that it was the right wing Harperites who wanted immigrants to pass a Canadian Values Test to make sure they were aligned with Conservative views.
These numbers are indeed troubling. However, the actual prevalence of each conspiracy belief in the population is likely lower for a couple of reasons.
1) Positivity bias - people are more likely to select agree/support responses than disagree/oppose responses.
2) Expressive responding - People who display high distrust of the government and social institutions may not place any stock in a particular conspiracy theory asked about on a survey, but wouldn't put it past institutional actors to do something messed up, especially if it's in their interest.
3) Inattention - Some respondents will select the "agree" option just because they are breezing through the survey.
However, even if these percentages are likely overestimates of actual beliefs, they are still alarming. They show that it doesn't take a ton of prodding to get high percentages of people to believe these conspiracy theories and act on their implications.
It's good that you ask these questions. It lets everyone know where the country stands. I disagree with all of these conspiracy theory's. The major problem now to quote former USA President Bill Clinton "it's the economy stupid"
I have to take issue with some of the wording, as a PhD in politics. Let's look at the WEF. I read the question and thought, well, yes they have a strategy but, no, they are not secretive at all, they have been very clear they seek to influence. But is influence the same as imposition, and does the distinction matter given what Trudeau and Freeland have said about the organization? On this basis, I'm not sure how I would have answered - yes (thus I'm a knuckle dragger) or no (I'm suddenly reasonable) - it might have depended on my mood that day. Either way, there is lots of space to criticize the organizers of the WEF. Yet the article proceeds under the guise that criticism of global elites is practically tantamount to conspiracy. I don't think so. Whereas the idea that all events are 'controlled' by a small group of people is indeed conspiracy, there is way too much grey area in the wording if I could have reasonably answered yes to the WEF question without actually believing in any conspiracy. The elites today have lost touch, they lack empathy for the workers of the world - to coin a phrase - and we have democratic institutions to check power. Wanting those institutions to work vis-à-vis elites cannot be confused with conspiracy. Thus, I don't think the analysis based on the data is very helpful and only feeds into the narrative that people who hold different viewpoints from the norm, or who are not experts in a topic and express themselves crassly, can be easily dismissed. No.
These survey responses are intriguing but should be followed up by asking more precise questions.
For instance, consider the assumption that 37% of Canadians agree that “there is a group of people in the country who are trying to replace native-born Canadians with immigrants who agree with their political views.”
This is said to be an articulation of what is commonly referred to as replacement theory., which is attributed to the right wing.
However, as a left winger I could easily agree with this statement. Recall that it was the right wing Harperites who wanted immigrants to pass a Canadian Values Test to make sure they were aligned with Conservative views.