Rob Brotherton, Conspiracy Theories and the Protocols of Zion

Lately I happened to peruse a recent-ish stereotypical pseudo-skeptic coffee table book about 'conspiracy theories' by a chap named Rob Brotherton. (1) I've read enough of these books to be able to summarize the basic argument from memory, but I was never-the-less interested to see what Brotherton had to say about that 'classic item of conspiracy theory' the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. (2)

I wasn't disappointed as it was one of very first items that Brotherton brought out was 'anti-jewish prejudice' and the Protocols of Zion. Brotherton's work, like that of David Aaronovitch before him, (3) is big on claims, but rather short on research.

His woeful lack of anything approaching serious comment is exhibited by quite frankly moronic claims like:

'Superstition and prejudice towards the Jews dates back to the earliest years of Christianity.' (4)

Except that statement leaves out all historical context, denies jews any agency in causing negative feelings about themselves (as it necessarily suggests that all such feelings are irrational bigotry) and also ascribes such agency wholly to a malevolent vision of Christianity in truly comic book fashion.

Working in reverse order: the last statement isn't factual as the Church's relationship with the jews and Judaism is the subject of a long standing scholarly debate (and the general tenor is not of the 'Hitler's Pope' type of thesis), (5) the second is a manifestly stupid line of reasoning (6) and the first is simply wrong. Since it ignores the fact that we know many peoples held negative feelings about the jews before Jesus was even born as evidenced by Strabo, Apion, Lysimachus of Alexandria, Manetho and so on. (7)

Is it really just superstition and prejudice that has uniquely followed the jews around throughout their recorded history?

Perhaps we ought to look for a more balanced and objective explanation that considers whether jewish behaviour might itself be a factor in the prevalence and persistence of anti-Semitism throughout many different cultures, societies, peoples and religions as Benjamin Ginsberg has done? (8)

That however requires some research and a little bit of knowledge. Unlike Brotherton's assertion in isolation that the Inquisition persecuted the jews. This is superficially true, but the Inquisition primarily concerned itself with the Marrano community (jews professing to be Catholics but keeping to jewish rituals and rites in secret).

Brotherton forgets to mention that the man, the infamous Tomas de Torquemada, who most vigorously pursued the Marranos and created the Spanish Inquisition (the one he is clearly thinking of) was himself of Marrano descent.

Oh and did I also forget to mention that it was jews themselves, such as Nicholas Donin, Pablo Christiani and the rabbis opposing the ideas of Moses Maimonides, who drew Christian attention to the insults against Jesus and the Virgin Mary in the Oral Torah and further into the realm of Judaica in general?

Don't mention that though, because that complicates Brotherton's argument significantly and it is much easier to blithely assert some well-worn nonsensical comment about how Christians have been responsible for so much persecution of jews.

Perhaps Brotherton isn't aware that said persecution and violence was often sparked by jewish behaviour and not the other way around? (9)

Be that as it may Brotherton's research is still... well... lacking to be polite about it.

No where is Brotherton's intellectual dishonesty (and plain ignorance) more obviously demonstrated (as with Aaronovitch and Wheen) (10) than in regard to his comments the Protocols of Zion.

Brotherton bases his claims solely – just as in Aaronovitch and Wheen (although they have more of an excuse) – on the work of Norman Cohn. (11) Cohn is certainly a useful source, but it is hardly balanced or even good practice to cite one theory about the origin of the Protocols without even citing the different critiques of it. A good example is that of Cesare de Michelis who demolished Cohn's whole theory from top to bottom several years ago. (12)

This is simply ignored and Cohn cited as being the authoritative work. This is wrong for the simple reason that even if you ignore de Michelis you'd have to take into account (for another example) the critique of Cohn's ideas in Pierre Taguieff's two volume 'Les Protocoles des sages de Sion'.

The use of a single source supposed by Brotherton to be 'authoritative' and/or 'representative' accounts for Brotherton's garbed chronology of the publication/evolution of the text of the Protocols. (13)

It also blows any intellectual credibility that Brotherton has out the water, because he is explicitly posing as someone who is taking a balanced and objective look at those with 'suspicious minds'. He completely fails in this, because despite appearances to those whose prejudices he wishes to confirm. He hasn't actually done any significant research into the subjects which he is offering chapter length opinions.

The absurdity of Brotherton's intellectual pretensions combined with his demonstrable lack of anything approaching intellectual rigor is encapsulated in his citation of the famous Marx and Darwin quote found in most translations of the Protocols of Zion. (14)

The problem is that if Brotherton had researched the academic literature on Protocols of Zion beyond simply relying on Cohn's work. Then he would have known that the famous quotation was originally Pavel Krushevan's – the original publisher of the Protocols – comment in parentheses, which was inserted into the text itself by Sergei Nilus. (15)

In other words the quote Brotherton is citing was not in the original document and therefore has, and can have, little to do with the authenticity or non-authenticity of the Protocols of Zion.

I will also note in passing that Brotherton explicitly makes his case (as does Cohn) on the claim by Princess Catherine Radziwill that 'she saw the document' twenty years earlier and 'immediately recalled it'. (16) Yet he doesn't mention (or more likely doesn't know) that Radziwill was a notorious fraudster in her time (17) and her evidence in and of itself is clearly anecdotal and unreliable.

Brotherton the self-professed intellectual sceptic is relying on a convicted fraudster who claims she saw an obscure document twenty years before and then remembered it when it became famous. Yet he doesn't know he is doing it, because he blindly trusts one source rather than reviewing the literature and then making an informed judgement.

Talk about lacking in criticality.

Brotherton is exactly the sort of sceptic that I despise.

Put another way he isn't actually an adherent of the sceptical intellectual methodology, but rather a man trying to make a fast buck and strut around looking passably intelligent by confirming the prejudices of other self-proclaimed secularly religious sceptics.

Talk about sheer irony.

References

(1) Rob Brotherton, 2015, 'Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe in Conspiracy Theories', 1st Edition, Bloomsburg Sigma: New York

(2) A far more thought provoking book about this subject is Robert Guffey, 2012, 'Cryptoscatology: Conspiracy Theory as Art Form', 1st Edition, Trine Day: Walterville

(3) David Aaronovitch, 2010, 'Voodoo Histories: How Conspiracy Theory has Shaped Modern History', 3rd Edition, Vintage: New York

(4) Brotherton, Op. Cit., p. 33

(5) Summarized well in Charles Freeman, 2011, 'A New History of Early Christianity', 1st Edition, Yale University Press: New Haven

(6) As explained so well in Albert Lindemann, 1997, 'Esau's Tears: Modern Anti-Semitism and the Rise of the Jews', 2nd Edition, Cambridge University Press: New York, pp. 4-39

(7) Cf. Erich Gruen, 2002, 'Diaspora: Jews amidst Greeks and Romans', 1st Edition, Harvard University Press: Cambridge

(8) Cf. Benjamin Ginsberg, 1993, 'The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State', 1st Edition, University of Chicago Press: Chicago

(9) Cf. Elliot Horowitz, 2007, 'Reckless Rites: Purim and the Legacy of Jewish Violence', 1st Edition, Princeton University Press: Princeton

(10) Francis Wheen, 2004, 'How Mumbo-Jumbo Conquered the World: A Short History of Modern Delusions', 2nd Edition, Harper Perennial: London

(11) Brotherton, Op. Cit., pp. 33; 43

(12) Cesare de Michelis, 2004, 'The Non-Existent Manuscript: A Study of the Protocols of the Sages of Zion', 1st Edition, University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln, esp. pp. 72-82

(13) Brotherton, Op. Cit., p. 31; compare to de Michelis, Op. Cit., pp. 5-15, which supersedes that of used by Cohn from Binjamin Segal, Richard Levy (Ed.), 1995, [1926], 'A Lie and a Libel: The History of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion', 1st Edition, University of Nebraska Press: Lincoln, pp. xi-xv

(14) Brotherton, Op. Cit., p. 32

(15) De Michelis, Op. Cit., p. 88

(16) Brotherton, Op. Cit., p. 38

(17) Cf. Brian Roberts, 1969, 'Cecil Rhodes and the Princess', 1st Edition, Hamish Hamilton: London