Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11

by Kathryn S. Olmsted

Many Americans believe that their own government is guilty of shocking crimes. Government agents shot the president. They faked the moon landing. They stood by and allowed the murders of 2,400 servicemen in Hawaii. Although paranoia has been a feature of the American scene since the birth of the Republic, in Real Enemies Kathryn Olmsted shows that it was only in the twentieth century that strange and unlikely conspiracy theories became central to American politics. In particular, she posits World War I as a critical turning point and shows that as the federal bureaucracy expanded, Americans grew more fearful of the government itself--the military, the intelligence community, and even the President. Analyzing the wide-spread suspicions surrounding such events as Pearl Harbor, the JFK assassination, Watergate, and 9/11, Olmsted sheds light on why so many Americans believe that their government conspires against them, why more people believe these theories over time, and how real
conspiracies--such as the infamous Northwoods plan--have fueled our paranoia about the governments we ourselves elect.

Genres: History, Politics, Nonfiction, American History, Conspiracy Theories, Audiobook, Journalism

336 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2008

Reviews

[Pavol Hardos · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent, compelling overview, overall balanced and considerate; the author demonstrates that heightened public conspiracism can be seen as a consequence of unsanctioned government crimes and real conspiracies, as well as elite conspiracy theorizing deployed for partisan purposes. A must-read for anyone interested in the political history of conspiracy theories and their uses and development in (US) politics.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Olmsted makes a couple of interesting arguments in this broad sweep of American conspiracy theories of the 20th and 21st centuries. First is that World War I qualitatively transformed the nature of American conspiracism, partly due to the growth of the federal government as a result of the war, and the preceding progressive emphasis on governmental solutions to social ills. The second is that American conspiracism has been fed in part by actual government conspiracies. Often these conspiracies aren't as deep and nefarious as the skeptics claim, but they involve more quotidian cover-ups. So, for example, Kennedy probably wasn't killed by an inside job against a man the CIA saw as too friendly to communists; but the federal government likely DID cover up the role of international communism in bringing him down, so as to avoid a potential nuclear war with Cuba and the Soviet Union (and to hide the FBI's own incompetence). She has to traverse a fine line of recognizing "official conspiracies" without going down the rabbit hole dug by tinfoil hat-wearers of the last 100 years.

[Beth · Rating 2 out of 5]

Most of this book was ok. I could see the author laying out the framework to go full liberal throughout but when she ended the book with a full two hour (audio version) diatribe on the Russia hoax against trump saying it was true, that was the end for me. It’s been proven false and her hero Clinton who she defends to the moon and back, was responsible. Pure partisan.

[Kym Robinson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Here is a book that attempts to cover over one hundred years of Conspiracy, specifically American. No easy under taking given the history of both suspicion, connivance and prevalent instincts to question authority found beneath the many regimes of the American 'republic'.

Olmstead does a decent job in lightly covering many of the more popular conspiracies, those outlandishly extreme to those more nuanced. She does this in a general manner however which sees her meandering some what about the place with oft little course. Often she would hope to link the 'believers' of such conspiracies together in one general group or a set of larger groups. Often the 'believers' are as nuanced as many of the theories about these conspiracies, discourse being widely shared among these ranks as many steer clear from the others. And yet they are often all tarred with the same brush of bigot, kook or conspiracy nut.

Olmstead addresses the conspiracies listed with an at best neutral skepticism hoping to grant each case with the historians pen. Unfortunately she has too few pages and words for some of them and perhaps over looks others that would require greater investigation or discussion. Not so much in the theories themselves but in the reasons that so many do actually believe in these specific conspiracies.

For many, Olmstead included, anything that is not admitted by the Government after the fact is a daft conspiracy. SO the very entity that uses secrecy, vile methods and sinister undertakings is also the illuminating torch when it comes to its own conspiratorial under takings. For many this is not acceptable. Many within the conspiracy community will never be satisfied with answers or a lack thereof, they shall forever swing from theory to theory with little time to digest. Others will become so dogmatic and invested in THEIR conspiracy that they fail to open their minds to new evidence, or through the majesty of mind, omit what they do not want and add in what they need to 'prove' what they already believe.

It is no easy thing taking on the task of writing a book about so many beliefs. Beliefs however born out of a very real ugly and sinister entity that does in actual fact lie, cheat and murder. Its very nature exists based upon fear, force and theft. It is not hard to realise that behind the obedient ranks of loyal citizens exist those that are frustrated, apathetic and cynical. And among those wary of government ranks are those that see conspiracy every where. The real conspiracies however are often subtle and not very sexy. They pass all by in plain sight. The ones that attract are elaborate and extreme and in that is the problem.

So many elements, so many variables and so many players often having to come together in order to make these incredible conspiracies a reality and still after so much time, No leaks or no insiders whispering facts. And the thing often cited by many Americans as the moment that 'democracy died' or 'the republic fell' (as though it was ever in existence prior) was Watergate. A botched keystone cops robbery. Some how the same entity could mastermind wider and more extreme conspiracies, despite its failure here.

I did like much of this book but it failed in that it did not provide much in depth information. It seemed to be more a blurb at times on conspiracies and those that sought to reveal them. Certainly this is a good addition to those that like books on Government cover ups or wider 'X file' related reads but it had its many flaws and seemed lacking.

In the end despite this book, most will never actually know the truth about many a conspiracies, that is the nature of such things. The truth may lurk beyond the many theories or some where blended among them all. No one will know. The one truth however, expressed however passively inside of these pages, but especially in the bloody pages of history, is that government all governments do conspire and lie. This is done for so many reasons but most of all in a self determined need to maintain control and pursue its own self interest. Within its ranks will be both true believers of some form of benevolent ideology to those cynical pragmatists of power, it will justify murder, kidnap, torture, theft, spying and lying and most, will love them for it. That is not conspiracy it is an open and widely revealed fact.

And let us imagine, let us perhaps that each and every conspiracy mentioned in this book and ones like it was revealed as being a truth, known proven facts. Facts to be exposed as the frightening conduct of governance to all of the people, then what?? Of all the truths already known and revealed, even some mentioned there within this book, what would it change? Nothing. The same entity would thrive and continue to do as it has and will always do. And most, not all, but most will love it, believe in it, trust it and support it no matter how much blood is spilt and lives crushed. That is no conspiracy and it certainly is not a uniquely American truth.

3 stars but was closer to 2.

60%

[Kathryn · Rating 2 out of 5]

A waste of $30.00.

I thought this book would be a non-biased look at why conspiracy theorists think the way they do without debating the merits of specific conspiracy theories.

I was wrong.

I already knew that the reason more people are distrustful of the government and media is because many people do know that that the government has lied in the past and that it has engaged in conspiracies; that the media distorts, and that the Internet and social media are breeding grounds for the most outlandish theories to gain a foothold among some people. This book did not add anything to this basic fact.

Also, the author did not hide her view that even conspiracies with solid evidence that there could be an actual TRUE reason not to believe the official story were, NOT true without going into the reasons for her viewpoint. (Of course, going into each conspiracy, such as the JFK assassination or the 9/11 attacks, would require at least 500 pages each.) In any case, this book is not objective, in my very definite opinion.

Another criticism is that she took the accepted view that Charles Lindbergh, Jr. was an anti-Semite. Although it is true that he was a white supremacist to the point of believing in the positive possibilities of eugenics, one of his very best friends was Harry Guggenheim -- and Guggenheim was, in fact, Jewish. (And also, btw, Lindburgh's only trip to Germany was in 1936. The main "problem" was that Lindbergh was undoubtedly an isolationist, and so my opinion is that his call for the U.S. to not become involved in WWII combined with his white supremacist views lead many to classify Lindbergh as a "Jew hater".) For more on this subject, I highly recommend A. Scott Berg's 1998 Pulitzer winning biography, "Lindbergh".

The only reason I did not give it just one star is because it was well-written and it did give some information that I did not know already, especially concerning the events leading up to the U.S. involvement in World War I.

[Tanya · Rating 4 out of 5]

I began this book wondering if Olmsted would be a proponent of the conspiracy theories out there with a clear agenda, but found her to be very objective - neither gullible nor downright dismissive. She examines the evidence and suppositions surrounding 20th-century conspiracy theories dealing with such events as Pearl Harbor, the JFK Assassination, Iran-Contra, and 9/11. While disproving most of the wilder theories, she demonstrates that it is the government's history of lies, secrecy, and state-endorsed conspiracy theories that gives fuel to all the others. Her thesis is summed up in her final sentence, "If antigovernment conspiracy theorists get the details wrong - and they often do - they get the basic issue right: it is the secret actions of the government that are the real enemies of democracy.

[Jeremy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fantastic counter (and update) to Hofstadter’s Paranoid Style. The link between Americans’ loss of faith in democratic institutions and the rise in conspiracy theories is not coincidental - especially when factoring in evidence of proven government conspiracies, which Olmsted reveals throughout. With the birth of the “modern state” and WWI, public angst (and reception) of ‘antigovernment conspiracies’ made many question whom they could trust. Important read.

[Dustin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Kathryn Olmstead’s “Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy, World War I to 9/11” is a masterful, prescient page-turner. Released in 2009 it’s no less relevant today—but it’s due a sequel. Sadly, the sequel would need to cover only a quarter of the time this book covers and it would likely be twice as long. As we all know conspiracy theories have become even more prevalent and mainstream in the past decade, not to mention downright stranger thanks to things like Qanon.
Olmstead book doesn’t so much try to debunk any particular theory so much as present the why of how a theory came to be. The root of conspiracy theories in America, according to the author, is a result of:
“The two-party system, combined with the democratic checks and balances created by the Constitution, produced a dynamic that fed the conspiracist imagination, which sought to explain real or purported failures of American democracy.” (p.6)
Olmstead differentiates between conspiracies, which do in fact happen and which she details in great length (including reasonable efforts by FDR to keep the secret that allied codebreakers had broken the Japanese codes they were still using to communicate during the height of WWII to the completely unreasonable acts of FBI agents secretly dosing unwitting strangers with LSD in bars to judge their reactions and much worse) and conspiracy theories which range from the reasonable (there was a second shooter in Dallas on 11/22/63—most likely not true despite how resistant most Americans are to accepting—to the outlandish (FDR allowed Pearl Harbor to be bombed to prompt US entry into WWII, Eisenhower covered up an alien crash at Roswell). She makes the rather valid observation that it’s understandable why so many US citizens believe the latter because US presidents such as Nixon and Reagan in particular operated in the application of so much of the former.
“Real Enemies” is a showcase of how much things change how often they remain the same. From loss of confidence in the press (“Most prominent newspapers…still ridiculed the idea of a conspiracy in John Kennedy’s assassination. As usual, the mainstream media, which believed official conspiracy theories without hesitation, regard alternative, anti-government theories as patently absurd.” ,p.167) to the merging for all practical purposes the negative impact of the far right and the far left (“…there were surprising similarities between the radical left and the paranoid right in post-cold war America. Extremists of all stripes feared one thing above all [the government]…’fusion paranoia’ would become the preeminent trend of conspiracism at the end of the millennium as both left and right found a common enemy to fight in their defense of the republic: their own government.” p.193).

Or, of huge relevance for our own time, the roots of far-right hate organizations at the bottom of so many conspiracy theories: “…the right drew on the ideas and strategies of earlier white supremacist movements. Calling themselves the Patriot movement, these activists of the 1990s had roots that stretched back to the neofascist organizations of the 1970s and 1980s. Groups like the Order, the Aryan Nations, and the Posse Comitatatus spread the ‘Christian Identity’ belief…After the end of the cold war these fringe groups helped to lay the foundation for a much larger movement. Building on the doctrines of the neofascists, the Patriot movement leaders emphasized a secular, libertarian form of government bashing. White supremacy took a backseat to a more marketable grievance: the threat posed to American citizens by their government.” These movements helped connect and unify antiabortion activists, anti-environmentalists, nationalists, unrepentant racists, survivalists, and gun rights activists. (p.193)
Perhaps the wildest section of the book is when we learn that the Oklahoma City bomber, Ted Kaczynski, met with the Unabomber met Timothy McVeigh in the exercise yard of their shared federal prison in Colorado. Ted, a leftist, worried about associating with a neofascist mass murderer like Tim but while talking to him he found he “sounded like a liberal”. Kaczynski and liberal writer Gore Vidal, who corresponded with McVeigh in prison, concluded McVeigh had just been “born in the wrong era” and thus couldn’t be the hero he was born to be. All of them blamed the government as the real threat as it “killed people in far larger numbers than was done in Oklahoma City.” (p. 202)
It’s never a partisan screed, however. Omstead points out that more than 70% of those under 30 in the early 2000s a majority of whom identified as liberal at that time believed that 9/11 was an “inside job” only arguing about whether it was because Bush and Cheney let it happen or made it happen. A parallel to more recent times is that unproven allegations of “voter fraud” in 2004, “convinced some Democrats that Republicans would stop at nothing to keep power.” (p.221). Of course, the fact that Bush and Cheney did in fact create their own theories and conspiracies to justify a war with Iraq they had been planning since their entry into the White House gave space for such theories to manifest, a central (and circular) premise of the book.
Highly recommended reading for all parties and a book well worth a sequel as mentioned above.

[Zaron · Rating 4 out of 5]

Real Enemies: Conspiracy Theories and American Democracy is an excellent primer on the growth of conspiracy theories and the secret machniations of the American government that fed them in the 20th century. Olmstead argues that conspiracy theories result from mistrust of institutions and the government. The mistrust is well earned due to various plots and lies that have emanated from presidents, banks, intelligence agencies, and other powerful actors. The thesis holds weight, obviously a healthy degree of skepticism is warranted to stories spun by politicians and intelligence agencies, and, of course, powerful financial interests and the forces of global capitalism do inflict innumerous wounds on Americans and people worldwide but the space from skepticism to theories is where the thesis slips. The vacuum of trust doesn't necessarily have to lead to conspiracy theories; if it does, then perhaps an exploration of human psychology the book shuns is in order. Not trusting the government or the media merely leads to ignorance, to then fill that ignorance with unsupported theories only makes sense if there's some human psychological need to 'know.' I'm personally skeptical that the erosion of trust is entirely due to the failure of government and institutions. While it makes sense that some of the erosion of trust comes from well publicized failures and malicious activity the reality is that there have always been failures, malicious actors, and power worthy of skepticism. The growing erosion of trust in government, since the 60's, and the media more recently is can not be entirely tired to failures or bad actions of either since neither of those traits are new. If the lack of trust stems from something deeper than bad actions then the thesis of the book falls apart both because mistrust doesn't necessary lead to conspiricism and mistrust isn't directly caused by bad actions. It's still a well written book that's worth reading, tracing conspiracy theories is always interesting and the book does it well, but the thesis doesn't hold.

[Erich · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not a book "about conspiracies" as much as a book about "why Americans believe conspiracies", a typical "above the fray" Oxford University Press approach. A basic overview of the standard well-known federal conspiracy theories from 1914 (1913, ahem) until 9/11. Not much new information for anybody already familiar with deep politics. The opening chapter on The Great War and Woodrow Wilson being the most interesting to me; some less common names and facts mentioned. Chapter Two on Pearl Harbor and Charles Lindbergh scratches some rough topics. I personally would have liked to see the book start with the Spanish-American War, as some believe that is the first beta-run of the "orchestrated" wars towards globalization.

Probably a matter of time before these "academic" books go the way of the banned nonsense podcasts. Anything promoting ideas and dialogue as opposed to collective monologue is very pre-2008.

[Jonah Hawthorne · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book for a political science course and wow. One of the most compelling books I've read in college. Theres a lot of American history the high school system dodges around due to a systemic desire to balance (or arguably prioritize) patriotism with education, so major governmental scandals like Iran-Contra, MKULTRA, ect, were never taught to me. As I've found reading this text these are important historical operations to know as a citizen to understand what your government is capable of. Furthermore, I gained a deeper understanding of Conspiracy Theory as an emerging mode of interpretation. The more I read the more I began to understand that conspiracy theorists often have some basis on a genuine reality or issue, however they consistently are wrong, leaping into fantastical conclusions as a result of delusions around rugged individual fantasies and/or growing distrust of the state as it's power is strengthened and centralized.

[Chris Barsanti · Rating 4 out of 5]

Smart rundown of 20th and 21st century American conspiracy theories which succeeds through a tight focus. Olmsted limits herself to those theories centered around government actions, and then doubles back to show how the government own proven engagement in conspiracies and cover-ups fans and fuels the public's increasingly unhinged paranoia.

[Kalei · Rating 4 out of 5]

Read for a graduate assignment on Media. Gave me a lot to think about regarding the history of mistrust in America that breeds conspiracies. Even though it was the updated 10th anniversary, I think it could have more meat on the present environment and conspiracies, one epilogue doesn't nearly cover it enough.

[Georgiana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean you don't have enemies....

...in other words, the reason why so many people believe in conspiracy theories is that governments (specifically of the USA here) have repeatedly engaged in real ones.

Sigh.

[Elaine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched and entertaining to read. I wish more time was spent on the recent conspiracies than the old ones.

[Manoj Solanki · Rating 3 out of 5]

The biggest conspiracies/theories in American history. It's really good how the author narrates from both sides - the government as well as the theorists.

[Mattschratz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Plus ça change.

[Hotavio · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am not completely sure why, but I didn't have it within myself to give this book too many stars.
I believe that Olmsted did provide a relatively objective view in relaying the plethora of conspiracies and conspiracy theories that have abound throughout the twentieth century. These theories often became interlinked or piggy-backed off of one another such as Wilson's role reversal on World War intervention, causing later skepticism over Pearl Harbor ineptitudes. WWII era political rifts led to the age of McCarthyism which birthed FBI wiretaps and government omnipotence- including using assassination as a tool of removing "threats". The people distrusted their government and the government reciprocated through the era of Watergate and up to age of the Patriot Act.
Most information covered was nothing new. A few items featured in Real Enemies barely warranted mentioning in a book that otherwise maintains its composure dealing with its often daffy subject matter. While there is not a concentration on Roswell, the topic does earn a few mentions as it is applied to various more credible theories. Trying to apply aliens to disasters such as 9/11 warrant an eye rolling. Olmstead does not promote such thoughts, only mentions them in pointing out that a general distrust of the government provokes sometimes credible people to stretch to make sense of all of our government's secrets. In a conclusion that smacked of a final thought on Jerry Springer, the author sums up the sometimes unintended dangers of some of the more outlandish conspiracies held, while chastising government for violating the trust of its own people. By this time, I was beyond ready to move on to some different subject matter.

[Lynn Schlatter · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you're not paranoid when you pick up this book, you will be by the time you put it down. The title comes from a Delmore Schwartz quote: "Even paranoids have real enemies," so Olmstead spends a great deal of time examining the proven cases where the American government has lied to the citizenry (and other parts of the government). After that, it's just a matter of tracing what Richard Hofstadter calls "the big leap from the undeniable to the unbelievable," and poof! You now understand most of the conspiracy theories of the twentieth century.

For me the main takeaway is that conspiracy begets conspiracy, and every conspiracy in its turn shoots out its own set of conspiracy theories. Take this (much simplified) sequence of events:

1. JFK conspires to have Castro assassinated because of his close ties to the Soviet Union.

2. JFK himself is assassinated.

3. LBJ conspires to ensure the Warren Commission does not point the finger at Castro to avoid heating up the Cold War.

4. Warren Commission report convinces nobody.

5. American citizens, with the help of stories planted in European newspapers by Soviet sources (a tactic I thought was new to this century, but apparently not), come to believe LBJ is responsible for Kennedy's assassination.

Enough to make you want to hunker down in a cave, amiright? Or at least maybe start telling the truth about things?

[Richard Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

"...secrecy is power..." Olmsted presents this concept through analysis of several significant historical events. In each case, she provides insights into conspiracies in a thorough discursive manner (975 endnotes). Each chapter ends with a synopsis which, at times, appears to be more commentary. This is unfortunate as it tends to bring overall objectivity into question. However, it is well worthwhile to the reader new to conspiracy theory.

[Amanda Rabon · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book- Olmstead presents an objective view (for the most part) of conspiracies from WWI- now. I learned quite a bit that I didn't know, which is exactly why I read this book. I'm trying to keep learning despite being out of college. I loved Olmstead's 174D class and thought I'd enjoy her writing style as well.

[Jeremiah Genest · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great overview of the 20th century that supports the author's view that conspiracy theory and paranoia grow becasue of the actions the government takes towards secrecy and that we are in a big giant feedback loop. Strongest for WWI to the Church hearings, weaker around 9/11 and the militia movements.

[Claire Haeg · Rating 4 out of 5]

A historian's account of US conspiracy theories. As a political scientist I wanted her to explain WHY and not just WHAT happened, but that's a disciplinary difference! A fascinating book, really, which really gets at the issues of epistemic closure that frame the neo-populist narratives (all of which are in some way founded on conspiracy theories!)

[Mark Cheathem · Rating 4 out of 5]

Review posted here: http://mcheathem.wordpress.com/2012/0...

[Rebecca Dunbar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent.

[Marty · Rating 5 out of 5]

An engaging and well written discussion.

[Noora · Rating 2 out of 5]

I can't believe I wasted my time on this.