The conversation
Can QAnon survive another ‘Big Disappointment’ on March 4? History suggests that it may
The big question hanging over QAnon: what will happen after March 4? Rick Loomis / Getty ImagesThe farm could be a big day. On March 4, Donald Trump will triumphantly return to power to help save the world from an obscure syndicate of Satan-worshiping pedophiles – or at least that’s what a small fraction of American citizens believe. But before setting the date and dusting MAGA’s hats, a note of caution: We’ve been here before. Adherents of the same conspiracy theory, QAnon, had previously marked January 20, Joe Biden’s inauguration day, as the big day. As Biden climbed the Capitol steps to take the presidential oath of office, tens of thousands of QAnon supporters eagerly awaited the arrest and imminent execution of Democratic politicians in a “storm” that would bring down the social and political order. This did not happened. After this disappointment, some disillusioned followers of QAnon left the herd. But, as evidenced by the new March 4 date – chosen because it was the day of the presidential inaugurations until the 20th Amendment was adopted in 1933 – some hardline members claimed that they simply missed the date. When – or if – that date also passes without incident, a new date may arise. One might think that a sufficient number of failed predictions would eventually discredit a prophet. But as a philosopher of religion, I know that history suggests a more complicated set of possibilities. Apocalyptic movements seldom simply dissolve when prophecies seem to fail. Indeed, such crises in the past presented believers with fertile opportunities to reinterpret prophecies. They even strengthened movements, giving rise to new theories that try to explain the deficiencies of the previous ones. The Millerites This dynamic occurred almost 180 years ago with the Millerites, members of a 19th century evangelical Christian movement who were part of an earlier “Great Awakening” in the religious history of the United States. Baptist preacher, William Miller relied on biblical texts and numerology to predict Christ’s imminent second coming. Although Miller did not initially claim to know the exact date, he and his followers offered several predictions. As each passed without incident, the Millerites redid biblical mathematics to propose new dates, until finally the movement was established on October 22, 1844. As the expected second advent approached, many Millerites donated their goods in anticipation of the Christ’s return. A caricature of a Millerite waiting for the end of the world. Library of Congress When October 22 came and went without incident, the Millerites were left to reconstruct a worldview that recognized what came to be called the “Great Disappointment”. Miller’s followers concluded not that the Scriptures and numerology on which they based their predictions were false, but simply that they had misunderstood their meaning. In one view, what the predictions predicted were not terrestrial events, but celestial ones. Millerism did not collapse; instead, elements of it were central to the establishment of Seventh-day Adventism, a rapidly growing Protestant denomination that remains anxious for Christ’s return. Crisis point Watching how the Millerites dealt with their Great Disappointment gives an idea of how believers navigate what philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre calls “epistemological crises”. These are moments when the way someone understands the world is called into question by events that do not fit expectations. Epistemological crises are not exclusive to religion. Anyone who has gone through a painful relationship or felt the rug being pulled under him when he was fired unexpectedly by an employer, knows that they are a fact of life. This crisis impairs a person’s ability to tell the kind of story about himself that gives order and meaning to life. If not resolved, it threatens the understanding of yourself and others. However, these crises are not always insurmountable. MacIntyre writes: “When an epistemological crisis is resolved, it is by building a new narrative, which allows the agent to understand how he or she could have intelligently supported their original beliefs and how he or she could have been so drastically tricked by them . ”Sometimes the new understanding repudiates the old one. Often, however, the new narrative is not a radical departure from the old one, but an improvised and more sophisticated version of it – one that incorporates what used to look like peripheral data points. The Millerites, for example, survived the Great Disappointment, reaffirming their belief that God is working in ways that humans cannot always fully anticipate. Writing in the mid-20th century, philosopher Antony Flew suggested that, over time, religious beliefs “die with the death of a thousand qualifications”. That is, they are modified beyond recognition, to the point of losing their meaning. But scholars of religion have documented a pattern in which, instead of dying, marginal beliefs evolve, becoming more socially acceptable. As they are gradually disentangled from politics, they are considered to be more truly “religious”. Making sense of disappointment Whether movements like Millerism can or cannot overcome major disappointments depends in part on the interpretive tools available within the group and the ingenuity of supporters in explaining their own unfulfilled expectations. It is unknown whether QAnon will survive its current epistemological crisis. And if that happens, there is no guarantee that you will be punished. Some commentators have predicted that it will return even more dangerous than before, evolving into increasingly virulent strains. It may well be included in a broader conspiracy theory that seeks to explain the current disappointment in the context of an even more elaborate narrative. Perhaps one day the QAnon will take its place in the domesticated pantheon of the American civil religion as another benign and depoliticized “faith”. Then again, it can just explode, causing the death of thousands of qualifications. But if history is any guide, QAnon’s survival from the Great Disappointment will depend on the ability of his adherents to explain to themselves how they could have been so drastically deceived. [Over 100,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world. Sign up today.]This article was republished from The Conversation, a non-profit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Richard Amesbury, Arizona State University. Read more: QAnon and the US Capitol Storm: the offline effect of online conspiracy theories Almost two centuries ago, a QAnon conspiracy theory led candidates to Congress. Richard Amesbury does not work for, consult, own shares or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article and has not disclosed relevant affiliations other than his academic appointment.