Comment: Good post Mike.

(See in situ)

Good post Mike.

A conspiracy is defined as 2 or more people planning to commit a crime. Often times when police are investigating crimes they have to come up with a theory on how the crime was committed. Does that make all investigators "conspiracy theorists?"

Also consider this: If a government wanted to stop citizens from investigating criminal activity by government officials, would it not be effective to demonize such behavior? "We can't have citizens investigating crimes. That's only for the police to do!" Can you see how the whole "conspiracy theory" label chills citizens from researching crimes? You can't very well report a crime to the cops if you have no evidence. You can, it just probably won't lead to a conviction. If you do have evidence, and you go to report the crime or treason to the cops, and they refuse to take your police report, then they are guilty of misprison of felonies, or misprison of treason, (18USC2382).

There is nothing wrong with coming up with theories on criminal activity planned by 2 or more people. Like another poster said, be willing to have your theory disproved, and willing to accept the truth if the given theory is disproved. Also, people who are not conspiracy theorists need to objectively evaluate the truth when facts and evidence supports the theory that 2 or more people planned to commit a crime.

The problem is not with "conspiracy theorists" - people who pose theories on how a crime was planned by 2 or more people. The problem is with the negative connotation society has given to these 2 words when they are put together. If one wanted to say, "making claims not supported by any grounds, or by weak or unwarranted grounds, hurts the liberty movement.", Ok that is a fair criticism of certain particular individuals who engage in that. However, that does not justify collectivizing all of those people into a group and affixing to them a label intended to be demeaning. That's not logical to do, if one is opposed to collectivism. Besides, putting these 2 words together and giving them a negative connotation is not much different than redefining the meaning of the words like the progressive left does all of the time, like redefining "income" so that it no longer means "gains or earnings on some sort of corporate activity", for example.

Well, that's what I think.