Conspiracist Beliefs, Democracy, and Autocracy: What the Evidence Suggests
Researchers from England, Belgium, and the Netherlands examined how belief in conspiracy theories relates to political attitudes, including views on democracy and autocracy. Their work appears in the European Journal of Social Psychology. The study team conducted a series of investigations to understand how people who entertain conspiratorial ideas respond to different political systems and institutions.
Conspiracy theories commonly allege that hidden powers are orchestrating major events behind the scenes. They frequently describe deception and manipulation by influential individuals or groups. Such theories tend to emerge and spread where trust in institutions is low and where people feel uncertain about who holds real power. In today’s world, social media algorithms can amplify these dynamics by creating echo chambers that connect like-minded individuals, making conspiratorial narratives more resonant and persistent.
In three separate studies, about 1,000 participants from Greece and the United States completed surveys that assessed belief in conspiracy theories alongside attitudes toward different political systems. Participants answered questions about their views on the current government and the prevalence or acceptability of conspiratorial ideas. The researchers aimed to see how conspiracist thinking aligns with support for various forms of governance.
Findings from the first study indicated a link between a higher propensity for conspiratorial beliefs and a weakening of trust in democratic institutions. Those participants tended toward political cynicism, expressing the belief that ordinary citizens have limited or no influence over governmental actions. In the second and third studies, a pattern emerged that connected belief in conspiracies with greater openness to, or support for, authoritarian methods of governance. The data suggested that conspiracist thinking might correlate with a preference for centralized power and constrained political pluralism.
The researchers identified political skepticism and perceived political powerlessness as the primary conduits that connect conspiracy beliefs to higher levels of support for autocratic leadership. In other words, when individuals feel they cannot influence political outcomes, they may gravitate toward systems that promise clear authority and decisive action, even if those systems limit democratic participation.
From a societal standpoint, the article emphasizes that the relationship between conspiracy beliefs and political preferences could be troubling, particularly given the widespread presence of conspiratorial content on the internet. The implications touch on how democracy functions in the digital age and how public discourse can be shaped by narratives that undermine institutions or erode trust in democratic norms.
At the same time, a measured level of scrutiny directed at politicians and policies is a healthy check on governance. The researchers argue that skepticism is compatible with a functioning democracy when it targets specific actors or policies rather than the democratic system as a whole. When critical thinking is applied to the actions of leaders and institutions, accountability improves and democratic mechanisms can operate more effectively.
One notable observation from the research is that belief in conspiracies may increase with age in some populations. This trend suggests that life experience, exposure to diverse information sources, or shifts in social networks could influence how people evaluate competing explanations for world events.