As Keely discussed in his article “Of Conspiracy Theories”, conspiracy theories can take many different forms and have many different implications. The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, however, goes above and beyond the usual conspiracy that proposes some government intrigue or scandal. The Protocols are, in a word, terrifying. The implications, though fabricated, are difficult to grasp simply because of how large they are. The Protocols claim to recount the minutes of a meeting of leaders of the Jewish Zionist community in the early years of the twentieth century. There are 24 protocols in total, each, rather repetitively, outlining the structure of a shadow government that has, apparently, been pulling the strings of many world governments for centuries, and plans to close its grip around the entirety of Europe soon. It also touts the plan for ultimately controlling all of the Gentiles, noting their apparent stupidity and inability to rule themselves. All, the Protocols claim, in the name of God.
There is not much specific theology referenced; however, since the group is claiming divine right to rule (in a sense), they must be pulling Old Testament scriptures from somewhere to justify their conquest (apocryphal texts could be used in this capacity as well, though lacking the credibility today of the rest of the Biblical canon). The Elders could easily be considered a religious extremist group, and many groups of today (presuming that this conspiracy isn’t actually true) may feed off of this text and the teachings that surround it.
For all of its controversy and bigotry, the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion does expose some notable truths, at least partial truths, about our society. The aspects of government and human nature that the Protocols seek to take advantage of and exploit could pose legitimate points of exploitations if a group intended to take over society in such a way. The flaws of liberty, as discussed, are not completely accurate as we have seen many examples of a free society that operates with general success, but the idea that “no one knows how to use [freedom] in moderation” speaks some truth to how we approach liberties (and the potential excess of them) in countries trying to adapt conservative governments into more liberal ones. If anything, the Protocols serve as a guide for how to protect ourselves from such a shadow government. It points out the places of weakness and exploitation, and, if we acknowledge the possibility of some such extremist group gaining power, we can make moves to “cover our asses” and prevent any such event from occurring.