Quotes from a bookshop, what people read, what

people believe, and the Guardian

Antony Penaud∗

August 25, 2015

Introduction

The subhead of a recent Guardian article1 is ”Conspiracies abound in the DomKnigi stores non-fiction section, but what is truly unknown is the extent towhich Russians believe what is written”.

But the article that follows doesn’t prove anything: it consists of a fewquotes from some books, a couple of comments by a ”political analyst”, and noattempt is made to prove that Russians believe those quotes.

Imagine a journalist walking into Waterstone’s in London, quoting a fewcarefully chosen books, and then claiming that this is what British people be-lieve.

In this essay we reproduce some polls conducted in different countries aboutdifferent conspiracies, list the current best selling books, and discuss the Guardianarticle.

Plan

1. Conspiracies (polls and comments)2. What do Russians, Brits and Americans read?ConclusionAppendix A. Conspiracies in the Ukraine crisisAppendix B. The first main quote in the Guardian article (Starikov)Appendix C. The second main quote in the Guardian article (Prokopenko)

∗antonypenaud@yahoo.fr1http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/14/hitler-was-an-anglo-american-stooge-

the-tall-tales-in-a-moscow-bookshop

1

1 Conspiracies

1.1 Some polls

9/11 (2008) Let’s look at the results of a poll2 conducted in 2008 in differentcountries re 9/11. The question was ”Who do you think was behind the 9/11attacks?”.Below we only report the percentages for a few countries of interest (we includethe country that gives the maximum percentages for each of the first three an-swers).

AQ US Israel other perpetrator don’t knowTurkey 39 36 3 1 21Ukraine 42 15 1 5 39Italy 56 15 1 7 21Russia 57 15 2 6 19GB 57 5 1 12 26France 63 8 0 7 23Germany 64 23 1 2 9Egypt 16 12 43 11 18

9/11 (2011) According to a BBC poll conducted in 20113, ”14% of peoplequestioned in the UK and 15% in the US did not believe the official explanationthat al-Qaeda was responsible, and instead believed the US government wasinvolved in a wider conspiracy. Among 16 to 24-year-olds that belief rises toaround one in four.”

France Following the DSK (Strauss-Kahn) scandal, a poll was conducted inFrance4: 57% believed it was a conspiracy. Note that as far as we know the polldidn’t specify what their theory was.

UK According to a 2013 yougov poll5, 38% of Brits believe Diana’s death wasnot an accident (41% believe it was an accident, 21% don’t know).

US Public Pollicy Polling conducted some polls in the US in 20136: it cameout that51% of voters say a larger conspiracy was at work in the JFK assassination7% of voters think the moon landing was faked5% of voters believe that Paul McCartney actually died in 1966

2https : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinionpollsabout9/11conspiracytheories3http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-145720544http : //archives − lepost.huffingtonpost.fr/article/2011/05/18/2498419dsk − le −

sondage− qui− fout− la− trouille.html5https://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/09/17/38-brits-princess-dianas-death-was-not-

accident/6http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2013/04/conspiracy-theory-poll-results-.html

2

6% of voters believe Osama bin Laden is still alive15% of voters think the medical industry and the pharmaceutical industry ’in-vent’ new diseases to make money28% of voters believe secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiringto eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or NewWorld Order” .While some of these high numbers might be partly caused by mistrust of the me-dia or of the government (Watergate, Iran-Contra, Iraq war), some clearly falseconspiracies have been actually generated by the media and the government:28% of voters believe Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Finance We tried to find some polls about finance related conspiracies (cre-ation of money, central banks, Goldman Sachs), but unfortunately couldn’t findany.

1.2 Le Monde Diplomatique article

Le Monde Diplomatique had a very long article about conspiracies in June2015. For non subscribers, Robert Fisk mentioned the article at length in TheIndependent7.

1.2.1 True false flags

Fisk: ”that inestimable French journal Le Monde Diplomatique this monthcarries a wodge of articles under the title ’Did you say conspiracy?’, painfullydissecting how many false-flag stories turned out to be true.There’s the Mukden incident, for example, a 1931 Chinese attack on impe-rial Japan which turned out to be a Japanese attack on China and led to theJapanese invasion of Manchuria, the Rape of Nanking, et al.Then there’s the 1933 burning of the Reichstag which might have been startedby the Nazis rather than the communists;the successful and real CIA-MI5 plot to overthrow Iran’s elected Prime Min-ister Mohammad Mossadegh, in which bombs were supposedly planted by (yetagain) communists;Israel’s 1954 ’Operation Susannah’ in which Israeli-organised attacks on UK andUS buildings in Cairo were blamed on Egyptian nationalists;and the 1964 Tonkin incident, when America reported totally imaginary NorthVietnamese attacks on a US warship, which led to the very real launching ofthe Vietnam War.Interestingly, Latin America provides even more proof of real US plots: Guatemala,Brazil, Chile, Argentina, Nicaragua, Cuba, you name it.

The French monthly also carries a very fair critique of those who believeGeorge W and his chums engineered the 9/11 attacks as if a US president who

7http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/america-siding-with-terrorists-like-alnusra-its-not-a-conspiracy-theory-10319370.html

3

screwed up everything he ever did in the Middle East was capable of bringingdown the World Trade Centre and of the Arab worlds obsession with Westernconspiracies that allow dictators and nations to duck their own responsibilityfor terrible events.”

1.2.2 Disqualifying critical thought

Le Monde Diplomatique: ”The accusation [of conspiracy] enjoys success in themedia, where it often aims to disqualify critical thought”.

1.3 Comments

Below are the conclusions we draw:• Russia doesn’t stand out in the only available poll in which we can comparecountries.• It seems that beliefs in conspiracies are a global phenomenon.• People tend to blame unfriendly countries (or political opponents) rather thanallies.• Some false-flag stories turn out to be true.• ”The accusation enjoys success in the media, where it often aims to disqualifycritical thought”.

Scepticism and rational thinking being the ideal to reach, we too often ob-serve the two following extremes:• Irrational questioning (eg people who believe that McCartney died in 1966 orthat Elvis is alive).• No questioning (eg people who believed unquestionably the propaganda in therun up to the Iraq war).

The second category also includes journalists (eg David Rose8 from theGuardian’s sister paper, see Nick Davies’s book ”Flat Earth News” for a compre-hensive examination of propaganda before the Iraq war, and much more aboutjournalism).

2 What Russians, Brits and Americans read

The lists below correspond to the best selling books on a particular week (or onan even shorter time period for the amazon lists).A recently released book might be high in the list but might not stay in the listfor very long. But still, there is some information in these lists, and we give thenumber of days (or weeks) the book has been in the list when they are available.

8As far as we understand he has, unlike others, become much more sceptical now.

4

2.1 Russians

Since the Guardian specifically mentioned the bookstore Dom Knigi on NovyArbat, we checked on their website what books were selling best. Here is whatwe found on 22 August 2015:1. a thriller by Boris Akunin.2. a sci fi book based on a video game (Metro 2035).3. Secret Garden by Scottish author Johana Besford (a book of illustration thathas been a worldwide bestseller).4. A book by John Green, an ”American author of young adult fiction” accord-ing to wikipedia.5. A book by Primakov (PM in the late 90s who died recently).6. A book by Jojo Moyes, a British journalist and romance novelist.7. The Civil code.8. 1984 by George Orwell.9. A book by Polyakova (she seems to write about fitness but also fiction).10. Another book by Jojo Moyes.

The above list is for all categories and we couldn’t find more granular infor-mation.

We also checked the list for Moskva9, the other large Moscow bookshop. Thelist is this time a top 100 and contains all categories.There was at number 12 ”Power”, Starikov’s new book (new entry in the top100). Note that at number 16 was a book by Stephen Fry (not a new entry).

We found a website10 that combined the sales of 11 bookshops (it is notclear which bookshops) to generate rankings. That top 100 for non fiction thatwas dated 05 August 2015 (the approximate date at which the Guardian articlewas written) did not contain any book by Starikov. The top 10 was quite closeto the Dom Knigi top 10, apart from a book on Salinger by Beigbeder whichwas at number 2. Stephen Fry was at number 13.

2.2 Brits

We asked Waterstone’s on Piccadilly if they published a chart and they said no.So, to have an idea of what Brits read we checked the non fiction bestsellers onamazon.co.uk. This is how it looked like on 20 August 2015:1 River of Time by Jon Swain, 1 day in the top 1002 The Scandalous Lady W by Hallie Rubenhold, 1 day in the top 1003 17 Carnations: The Windsors, The Nazis and The Cover-Up by Andrew Mor-ton, 126 days in the top 100.

9http://www.moscowbooks.ru/catalog/bestsellers.asp10http://pro-books.ru/raiting/nehud

5

Note that in the US that book is called ”17 Carnations: The Windsors, TheNazis and The Biggest Cover-Up in History”, the title was probably toned downfor the UK.

2.3 Americans

2.3.1 Amazon

On amazon.com, the chart for all books best sellers was (on 20 August 2015):1 The Rabbit who want to fall asleep by Carl-Johan Forssen Ehrlin2 It is about Islam: Exposing the Truth by Glenn Beck

According to Wikipedia, Beck is a host on Fox News, ”his critics contend hepromotes conspiracy theories and employs incendiary rhetoric for ratings” andhe once said ”There is more proof for the resurrection of Jesus than man-madeclimate change.”.

A huffingtonpost article called ”The Top 9 Glenn Beck Conspiracy Theo-ries”11 includes his view that there was a cover-up regarding a Saudi nationalat the Boston bombing.

2.3.2 NYT

The number 1 (for the week of 23 August when it was a new entry and forthe week 30 August too) of the NYT best sellers in the hardback non fictioncategory is a book called Plunder and Deceit, by Mark Levin.

The NYT description of the book is ”The talk-radio host urges young Amer-icans to resist the statist masterminds who he says are burdening them withdebt, inferior education and illegal immigration.”.

In February 2015, he said in his talk show: ”You know what Obama’s doingtoday? He is building the Iranian Islamo-nazi caliphate.”12

2.4 Number of copies sold

According to Wikipedia, Starikov has written 14 books. Most books have beenprinted at around 5,000 copies (it is not clear how many were sold). The onethat was most printed was printed at 40,000.In 2010, Glenn Beck had sold 5 million copies of his books in the US13.

11http : //www.huffingtonpost.com/bob − cesca/the − top − 9 − glenn − beck −cons b 3361097.html

12http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/michael-w-chapman/mark-levin-obama-building-iranian-islamo-nazi-caliphate.

13http://www.dailyfinance.com/2010/06/29/glenn-beck-the-publishing-industrys-biggest-hope/ In the Guardian article a bookseller says he’s not sure that Russians read moreconspiracies than Americans, but the Guardian dismisses him as ”playing down the influenceof these books”

6

Levin has sold over 1 million copies of his book ”Liberty and Tiranny” (seeWikipedia).

Conclusion

A Guardian article states some conspiracies and claims that Russians believethem, on the grounds that some books could be found in bookstores.

We have studied some polls on conspiracy theories and in those polls Russiadoesn’t stand out. We have found that some conspiracy theories are popular inthe US, UK and France, but we have no reason to believe that their popularityis restricted to those countries.

We have looked at the current bestselling books in Russia, the UK and theUS and found that some conspiracy related books sold well in the US, and alsoin the UK. Unlike the Guardian, we do not mock the entire population of thesecountries nor do we assume that the buyers of these books believe all that is inthem.

One of the two most ”outlandish” conspiracies mocked by the Guardianturns out to be true (the Prokopenko quote, see the BBC article quoted in Ap-pendix C).

This poorly argumented Guardian article, which is more interested in de-monising Russians than in trying to inform its readers, is - sadly - just one ofmany that one can read in Western media nowadays.

7

Appendix A: Conspiracies in the Ukraine crisis

The Ukraine crisis offers a good example of what we observed in the 9/11 pollsper country: people tend to blame their political opponent.

The Maidan snipers

In a leaked conversation14 between Catherine Ashton (Vice-President of the EUand High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policyfor the EU) and Urmas Paet15 (Minister of Foreign Affairs for Estonia), Paetsaid ”And second, what was quite disturbing, this same Olga [Bogomolets, adoctor who helped the wounded] told as well that all the evidence shows thatthe people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen andthen people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing peoplefrom both sides (...) And it’s really disturbing that the new coalition they don’twant to investigate what exactly happened, so that there is now stronger andstronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but itwas somebody from the new coalition.”.

The German TV channel ARD was one of the few Western media not ig-noring (or mocking16) it. They screened their independent investigation aboutwhat happened that day and their conclusion was in line with the leaked con-versation.One year after the events the BBC also casted doubt about the official version17,and a late 2014 Reuters investigation exposed ”serious flaws” in the Ukrainianprobe18.

Research by Ottawa academic Ivan Katchanovski19 was largely ignored byWestern media. However, re MH17, blogger Eliot Higins was quoted by mostWestern media as a serious expert despite the fact he had no expertise and wasdescribed by Postol (MIT Professor of Science, Technology, and InternationalSecurity) in these terms: ”As far as his analysis, it’s so lacking any analyticalfoundation it’s clear he has no idea what he’s talking about.”20

14The conversation was leaked on 6 March. It can be found on youtube.15Both Ashton and Paet went to Kiev to support the protests.16Some media at first didn’t report the leaked conversation. When they finally reported it

(possibly because of its large spread on social media), they mocked it.17http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-3135902118http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/10/us-ukraine-killings-probe-special-report-

idUSKCN0HZ0UH2014101019http://uottawa.academia.edu/IvanKatchanovski20The Postol quote is in relation to his blogs on Syria. His blogs on MH17 have also

been criticised by professionals: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/expert-criticizes-allegations-of-russian-mh17-manipulation-a-1037125.html

8

”Yats is the guy”

In the infamous ”f*ck the EU” leaked conversation between Nuland (AssistantSecretary of State) and Pyatt (US Ambassador to Ukraine), the two officialsdiscussed who should be in the next Ukrainian governement21.In particular Nuland said that Klitshko shouldn’t go into government and that”Yats is the guy”.When a new government was formed shortly after this conversation, Klitshkodidn’t go into government and Yatsenyuk became Prime Minister.

MH17

Here the natural scenario is that the airplane was shot down by rebels by acci-dent.However some US intelligence veterans are not convinced and have written anopen letter to Obama asking to release evidence, if he had any22.

Regardless of who shot the airplane down, we know that the rebels had shotdown a Ukrainian military plane flying at a high altitude a few days before theMH17 tragedy.One could therefore argue that the people responsible for keeping sending air-liners (without the passengers knowing) in the rebel-held area should shareresponsibility.

MH370 On CNN, Jeff Wise, ”a private pilot and science writer” explainedthat Putin had ordered Russian special forces to hijack Malaysia Airlines flightMH370 and fly it to a spaceport in Kazakhstan. ”Maybe he wanted to demon-strate to the United States, which had imposed the first punitive sanctions onRussia the day before, that he could hurt the West and its allies anywhere inthe world,” he wrote in New York Magazine. ”Maybe what he was really afterwere the secrets of one of the plane’s passengers. Maybe there was somethingstrategically crucial in the hold. Or maybe he wanted the plane to show upunexpectedly somewhere someday, packed with explosives. There’s no way toknow.”23.

Nemtsov

In this case the conspiracy became the natural theory for Western media andno effort was spared to find Putin some motives: Nemtsov was presented like apopular politician when only 1% of Russians trusted him24, and it was claimedthat Nemtsov was about to release a report (about the involvement of Russian

21http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-3269509822https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/22/obama-should-release-mh-17-intel/23http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/flight-mh370-wreckage-the-14-

conspiracy-theories-that-could-explain-where-the-plane-is–and-what-happened-to-it-10425327.html

24http://www.levada.ru/07-02-2014/uznavaemost-oppozitsionnykh-politikov

9

troops in Ukraine) that would damage Putin immensely. It didn’t cross themind of these journalists that his collaborators would be in possession of thereport too. Nemtsov’s collaborators released the report a couple of months afterNemtsov’s murder25, and it had no impact on Putin’s approval ratings.

25http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-32705610

10

Appendix B: The Starikov quote

Let’s now have a closer look at the two quotes that are the most shocking forthe Guardian.

The quote

”Washington and London need fools to fight for them, because they don’t liketo fight themselves. This is why they brought Adolf Hitler to power in Germanyin 1933. You need the person who will start the war, who will not flinch fromcommitting crimes and shedding blood. . . It’s the same today. They need amadman who will start a new world war in order to save the dollar.”.

Comments

”Washington and London need fools to fight for them”

In a 1998 interview, Brzezinski (US National Security Advisor in 1980) said”According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen beganduring 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise. Thatsecret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Sovietsinto the Afghan trap(...). The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border,I wrote to President Carter, essentially ”We now have the opportunity of givingto the Soviet Union its Vietnam War”.”26.

”This is why they brought Adolf Hitler to power in Germany in 1933”

We have found online a Starikov article related to this view27.

OSCE The article starts with ”A recent resolution by the parliamentary as-sembly of the OSCE declared that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany heldequal roles in unleashing WWII”.When reading this we first thought that Starikov made up that OSCE decla-ration. But we checked, and it is true: the OSCE did make such a resolutionin the Summer of 2009 (was this rather late resolution connected to diplomatictensions following the 2008 Georgian war?).In all cases we share Starikov’s indignation on this. We could ask ourselvesmany questions: was Versailles too harsh (see Keynes)? Should Germany havebeen dismantled like Austria-Hungary? Should France and Britain have starteda war earlier? Should the Allies have gone to Berlin in 1918 (some in the Ger-man Army felt they hadn’t lost the war since the Allies didn’t enter Germany

26http : //dgibbs.faculty.arizona.edu/brzezinskiinterview27http://www.sott.net/article/298259-The-Americans-who-funded-Hitler-Nazis-German-

economic-miracle-and-World-War-II

11

and that they had therefore been ”stabbed in the back”, others like Chevene-ment see the 1918 German armistice as a tactical pause28)? Was appeasement(Munich) a good idea (note that Poland and Hungary also annexed territoriesafter Munich)? Was it wise for France and Britain to refuse a peace treatywith the Soviet Union in 1939 (and therefore pushing Stalin to do a pact withGermany)29?These questions are valid questions, but France, Britain and other countries arenot responsible for Germany starting WW2.

Conspiracy Back to Starikov: his article is indeed conspirationist (e.g. heclaims that the 1929 crisis was unleashed to ensure that the Nazis would rise topower!).In 2004 the Guardian ran an article called ”How Bush’s grandfather helpedHitler’s rise to power”30. But claiming that the people who funded the Nazisdid so on orders of foreign governments so that Germany starts a war againstthe Soviet Union is a conspiracy theory on more than one level.

Tit for tat? Would Starikov have written all this if the OSCE hadn’t madethat declaration (this OSCE declaration is part of a trend that blames Russiafor much: many Western media now insinuate that Russia started the 2008Georgian war when a 2009 EU report blamed Georgia31, and Ukrainian PMYatseniuk declared in early 2015 ”we all remember very well the Soviet invasionof Ukraine and Germany”)?We could see Starikov’s conspiracy theory as a tit for tat (conscious or not?)response: ridiculous claims blaming Moscow are countered by ridiculous claimsblaming Washington and London.One should however note the difference: Starikov is only a writer, while theOSCE is an official European organisation.

”They need a madman who will start a new world war in order tosave the dollar.”

Ron Paul Paul32 (former US congressman): ”In November 2000 SaddamHussein demanded Euros for his oil. His arrogance was a threat to the dollar;his lack of any military might was never a threat. At the first cabinet meetingwith the new administration in 2001, as reported by Treasury Secretary PaulO’Neill, the major topic was how we would get rid of Saddam Hussein - thoughthere was no evidence whatsoever he posed a threat to us. This deep concernfor Saddam Hussein surprised and shocked O’Neill.

28http://www.chevenement.fr/1914-2014/29For example http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=387530http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar31http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/6247620/EU-blames-

Georgia-for-starting-war-with-Russia.html32https : //www.lewrockwell.com/2006/02/ron − paul/why − the − us − hates − iraq −

iran− and− venezuela/

12

It now is common knowledge that the immediate reaction of the administra-tion after 9/11 revolved around how they could connect Saddam Hussein to theattacks, to justify an invasion and overthrow of his government. Even with noevidence of any connection to 9/11, or evidence of weapons of mass destruction,public and congressional support was generated through distortions and flat outmisrepresentation of the facts to justify overthrowing Saddam Hussein.

There was no public talk of removing Saddam Hussein because of his attackon the integrity of the dollar as a reserve currency by selling oil in Euros. Manybelieve this was the real reason for our obsession with Iraq. I doubt it was theonly reason, but it may well have played a significant role in our motivation towage war. Within a very short period after the military victory, all Iraqi oilsales were carried out in dollars. The Euro was abandoned.”

Although Ron Paul’s view is more nuanced than Starikov (Paul doesn’t thinkit was the only factor), he claims that many share the same view as Starikov.Our point is to show that some US politicians have a view close to Starikov onthis.

Causes? Note also that arguing (like many politicians and journalists) as ifmorality was the sole factor when deciding for an intervention is absurd (seeChomsky, but also realists like Mearscheimer for example).There are clearly different factors when deciding for an intervention, and onewould be very naive to believe that economic factors (eg oil and gas) have littleimportance.

Finally, the will of the BRICS to change the world financial system has beena source of tension between Russia and the US for some time.

13

Appendix C: The Prokopenko quote

The second quote is described in the Guardian as ”even more outlandish”.

The quote

”Recent scientific studies have shown that females will soon be able to takethe male role in reproduction, with no external interference. The first cases ofself-fertilisation have already been registered. Biologists say that without men,women will not die out immediately, but will instead slowly change their form,in a reverse process of evolution(...).”.

Comments

From a recent BBC article33: ”Ten years ago, Japanese researchers unveiled amouse that had two mothers but no father (...) Should several female komododragons wash up on a virgin island, they’ll be able produce males and kickstart a brand new colony. Likewise, parthenogenesis in sharks came to lightafter several incidents in which lone females kept in aquariums inexplicably fellpregnant.”. The BBC article speculates that the same could apply to humans,but that it wouldn’t be a good idea because of the lack of genetic diversity itwould generate in future generations.

Reference The Guardian mocks Prokopenko for his lack of ”external refer-ence”, when a simple google search would have found the BBC article.

An innocent error? Furthermore, the Guardian totally transforms Prokopenko’squote, saying mockingly that ”women have evolved to be capable of reproducingwithout the need of sperm”. Prokopenko doesn’t say that at all, he says ”thefirst cases of self-fertilisation have already been registred”: he is not talkingabout humans nor is he saying it has occured by evolution (it has happenedin the laboratory). Besides, Prokopenko saying ”females will soon be able totake the male role in reproduction” clearly implies that it hasn’t happened (andProkopenko refers to other animals, not humans).

The Guardian concludes with patronising comments about Russian people:distortion of facts and demonisation of Russians is the recipe for many of itsarticles.

33http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140530-do-we-need-sex-to-reproduce

14