Hatred Makes Fools of Us All

Tucker Carlson’s conspiracies show that animosity fuels gullibility.

Earlier this week, the Nord Stream 2 pipeline that supplies natural gas from Russia to European customers suffered serious damage in what many believe was an act of sabotage. Explosions were detected before three separate leaks began venting vast amounts of gas from the damaged pipeline.

We don’t know yet who sabotaged the pipeline (we’re not even certain it was sabotaged), but immediately, a number of popular far-right voices blamed the United States. Yes, the United States. On Tuesday night, Tucker Carlson—host of the most popular cable news program in the country—not only downplayed the idea that Russia was responsible for the damage, but raised the possibility that the Biden administration executed the attack.

What was Carlson’s case for such a remarkable claim? A Washington Post analysis called it “shoddy,” and that’s charitable. He cited Joe Biden’s promise to “bring an end” to the pipeline if Russia invades Ukraine. He also named State Department official Victoria Nuland, who said in January, “If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward.”

Turning Point USA Founder Charlie Kirk went even further than Carlson the following day, declaring that American intelligence agencies are “guilty until proven innocent.” Kirk also wondered aloud whether the damage to the pipelines was part of a “potential midterm-election operation.” Other right-wing voices picked up and amplified the same speculations.

Yet expressions of opposition—even strident opposition—to a pipeline are a long, long way from evidence of a violent attack against the pipeline. If you’re going to make the extraordinary claim that the United States blew up a principal energy source for our key allies, you’re going to have to do more than simply cite diplomatic bluster.

Carlson’s speculations weren’t mere harmless, crowd-pleasing bluster. Russian television ran his monologue at least 12 times in 12 hours the day after it was broadcast. Carlson’s segment was an undeniable gift for Russian propaganda.

Because I live in deep-red America, I’m more immediately familiar with right-wing conspiracies and right-wing conspiracy culture than I am with the most toxic elements of contemporary progressive America. And here’s one thing I see virtually every day: Hatred is making people foolish. Hatred is making people gullible.

The process works like this: The more negative your view of your opponents, the more likely you’ll believe even the wildest claims against them. We saw this quite starkly on January 6. Masses of Americans descended on the Capitol, fervently believing some of the dumbest and most transparently implausible lies I’ve ever seen.

Italian military satellites switched ballots? Dominion Voting Systems is linked to the Venezuelan government and supports antifa? The government is run by a cabal of Satan-worshipping pedophiles? Are people serious?

Yes, very. And think through how these beliefs form. A certain degree of raw animosity for your opponents has to exist before you’ll entertain the possibility that they’re capable of such dreadful things. As I wrote after January 6, a person had to believe a series of enabling lies before they believed the activating lie, the thing that put them in the streets.

Here’s a sample of enabling lies before the attack on the Capitol: America will end if Biden wins. The Biden administration will destroy the Church in America. The left hates you (and might even want you dead). If you believe that Biden and the American left are that hostile and that destructive, is it terribly hard to believe that they’ll tamper with voting machines? Or that they’ll even go so far as to abuse children?

Enabling lies almost always exaggerate both the stakes of political conflict and the perfidy of your political opponents. They create a background stance of animosity that makes you willing to believe almost anything. Indeed, once you reach a certain level of raw hatred, the wilder the story, the better. It confirms your priors.

Animosity is so powerful that it can render you vulnerable to conspiracies or other forms of misinformation even when your animosity is based in real scandal. For example, legitimate outrage at improper Trump campaign rhetoric about Russia or Trump campaign contacts with Russians caused many Americans to believe even the wildest claims made against Donald Trump in the infamous Steele dossier.

Right-wing voices who want to dismantle the FBI can point to any number of terrible scandals in the bureau, dating back to its founding. Similarly, progressives who want to defund the police can point to a long legacy of violent and corrupt acts from police at every level of state and local government.

But prior bad acts and scandals should make us skeptical, not gullible. The American government has lied to the American people many times in the past. And so we don’t automatically believe what it says. That’s fundamentally different from either automatically disbelieving the government or automatically believing (or seriously entertaining) the wildest claims of misconduct.

After the FBI search of Trump’s residence, my counsel was simple—watch and wait. Don’t presume that the DOJ behaved properly, and don’t assume it was corrupt. Wait for the evidence to emerge. And when it did, the FBI’s concerns about Trump’s conduct were vindicated.

Similarly, when it comes to the pipeline explosions, it’s also prudent to watch and wait. See where the evidence leads, and take every single speculation with a grain of salt. Contrary to Charlie Kirk’s assertion, no one has to prove their innocence. Instead, allegations (or even accusatory “questions”) must carry with them meaningful proof of guilt.

We’re all vulnerable to our own animosities. We’re all far more prone to believe allegations against opponents than we are to believe allegations against allies. What must we do to counter this temptation? I like a rule established by a person who follows me on Twitter: “The more I emotionally like the vibe or content of a tweet,” they wrote, “the less I should trust its veracity.”

This is good practice. Be skeptical of your instincts and desires; they’re tainted by bias. Otherwise, we’ll find ourselves slipping into our own versions of Tuckerism—so blinded by partisan animosity that we’ll fall for almost anything. Hatred can make fools of us all.