You're Using 'Conspiracy Theory' Wrong - Here's Why
Lionel Nation clarifies that rejecting the label "conspiracy theorist" often stems from fear of sounding baseless rather than addressing the legal definition. Derived from Latin conspirare (to breathe together), conspiracy legally denotes an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime, distinguishing sole agents like Lee Harvey Oswald from accomplices. While federal law treats planning itself as a distinct crime once an offer is made, public usage incorrectly implies a hypothesis lacks factual foundation. Ultimately, the term should technically describe multi-agent involvement, yet society wrongly equates it with superstition or unsupported claims. [Automatically generated summary]
You'll hear somebody say, you know, I don't want to be a conspiracy theorist.
You know, I know this sounds like a conspiracy.
I know this is a conspiracy, and they call it a conspiracy or conspiracy theorist.
Wrong, It's the wrong term.
What they mean to say is, I know this sounds crazy.
I know I have a theory about some alternative version of something.
I know I'm providing to you a kind of a theory about something that may or may not be based in fact.
I know something that you might think is either superstition or crazy.
That's what people are saying.
That's what people are saying.
People are saying, you're saying something that's crazy, that's baseless, that doesn't have any foundation.
That's a wivest tale.
That's mythical, that's mythology.
You got it?
Good.
That's what they mean.
First, a conspiracy.
The word is interesting.
It means to do something with somebody else.
The word conspiracy from the Latin or versions of it is conspirare, to breathe with, no, respiration, suspiration.
By the way, suspiration is, these people who do it out there, these sires, they drive me crazy.
That's suspiration.
Respiration, you know.
But a conspiracy means to breathe with, meaning an organization, an agreement, a confederation, a kind of a plan between two or more guilty people,
meaning people who are planning to do something, not some cop thrown in there, pretending to be a conspirator, but because the old days, some jurisdictions say you can't be charged with conspiracy if you're conspiring with a cop, because they're not going to do it.
You need two guilty people.
Anyway, two or more guilty people conspiring.
That's all it means.
Working together, planning something.
If Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, if Tyler Robinson acted alone, that's one thing.
He's the sole agent.
If he worked with, if he planned, if somebody aided, abetted, counseled, procured, hired, encouraged.
Now we get into this kind of this accomplice thing.
And then sometimes when the accomplice gets a little bit more involved, you have a conspiracy where I'm planning.
I call you up.
Hey, listen, I can get a load of, you know, whatever this drug is, or listen, we can do something.
You know, listen, let's do this.
And the moment I hang up or finish the offer, the conspiracy has been committed.
Because in federal court, in particular, you're charged with the crime and the conspiracy.
Which is going to be dundant.
You're charged with you killing somebody and planning to kill somebody with somebody else.
It's the planning.
That's what they, that's a separate and distinct thing.
That's the conspiracy.
Conspiracy to commit, conspiracy.
So when you say, is this a conspiracy theory?
That to me means is this a theory or a hypothesis or some kind of argument that says that more than one person was involved in this.
That's not what people mean.
You don't care about how many people were involved in something.