1,972 words
Listen to this article:
I've always been interested in conspiracy theories.
Whether it’s "we never landed on the moon," "9/11 was an inside job," or "be careful in the ocean so you don’t fall off the side of the Earth," you have to admit — it’s interesting.
I've always liked it when people went against what "we" consider normal.
And we shouldn't dismiss someone as crazy because they think differently.
Sure, many of the theories, if not most, are crazy.
But that's precisely my point. We're quick to call someone "crazy" when they hold a belief we don't share.
And once we do that, we stop thinking critically, which, ironically, is how most bad ideas become mainstream in the first place.
My conspiracy theory is better than yours
I've always had this idea of a conspiracy theory to end all conspiracy theories — the ultimate conspiracy theory. And I actually believe it.
What if... hear me out... the government created conspiracy theories?
Do I think the government actually cooked up conspiracy theories in a lab or some secret roundtable?
Probably not — well, maybe. Look, I have no idea.
Do I believe the government and societal elite suppress unpopular opinions? Absolutely.
That's what conspiracy theories are: unpopular opinions. So we have to be careful.
The first definition of conspiracy theory is "a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators."1
No, I don’t literally believe the government created conspiracy theories, but I do think they’re happy to see certain ideas dismissed under that label.
The government provides the "standard explanation," and intelligent people often reject their version of such. If you haven't figured it out yet, the government serves as the "conspirators" here.
But maybe it's not that far-fetched
Funny enough, that idea — that powerful people might encourage the "crazy" label — isn’t so out there. In fact, the phrase "conspiracy theory" has its own conspiracy theory.
The idea goes like this: The CIA allegedly popularized the term to make anyone questioning official stories — especially critics of the Warren Commission and its take on the JFK assassination2 — sound like tinfoil-hat hobbyists.3
It’s a bit like calling someone “crazy” just to save yourself the trouble of explaining.4
Political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith picked up this trail in his 2013 book Conspiracy Theory in America, pointing out that the phrase really took off after 1964, the same year the Warren Commission published its findings. According to him, The New York Times used “conspiracy theory” in five stories that year — and that’s when the term escaped the lab and started running wild through American conversation.5
Now, before you grab your trench coat and sunglasses, there’s a twist.
Michael Butter, Professor of American Literary and Cultural History at the University of Tübingen, took a magnifying glass to this rumor in 2020. He looked directly at the CIA memo everyone cites — Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report — and found that it never actually says “conspiracy theory” (singular) at all. The phrase “conspiracy theories” only appears once, in this line:
“Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organisation [sic], for example, by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us.”
So, yes, the CIA might have been worried about its image — but inventing the phrase “conspiracy theory” probably wasn’t on its to-do list.
Turns out, even conspiracies about conspiracies have their own plot holes.
That was half a century ago — but the same dynamic plays out every time controversy hits the news cycle.
Let’s look at how a more recent situation unfolded.
Using death for politics
I first wrote this article a week or so after George Floyd's death.
If you don't remember who that is, he's the man who died after Officer Derek Chauvin’s prolonged pressure on his neck.6 7
There has been a lot of arguing, misinformation, and disinformation about this. It's a classic "two things can be true at the same time" scenario:
- Floyd did have drugs in his system
- Floyd had health conditions that would make Chauvin's knee even more of a threat
However, he ultimately died because of this officer's negligence.
"Would someone else without the drugs or medical condition have died?"
I don't know why people thought that was the right question.
The left and the right both found ways to use his death for political gain.
As for the officer responsible here, I doubt it was intentional, but neglect is a form of abuse.
A conspiracy theory can arise almost instantly from controversial issues, especially when the red elephant in the room and the blue ass have polarized views on a situation.
Sadly, as Floyd famously said, "I can't breathe," with his last words, "I can't breathe" became a slogan of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement.
We saw this conspiracy theory mindset play out in this situation...
Remind me again which lives matter
"The unheard is becoming the heard, breaking free from the suppression the government has often imposed on the issue at hand: Violence, specifically against blacks, specifically by police officers."
That seems like a good thing until the issue at hand is also solved with violence.
That first line was among many words removed from the official BLM website. And it isn't even that alarming a line compared to some others they removed.
The actual BLM group scares me at times, and I don't necessarily stand behind the BLM title. That's as far as I'm going to go on the issue of BLM as an organization.
Of course, I believe black lives matter. All lives matter, sure, but the issue in the media right now is about black lives. It's ok to support specific lives and acknowledge problems with police brutality.
Police should have strict rules of engagement, as we do in the military.
They shouldn’t have the legal cover to justify killing someone just because they can cite "probable cause." They have a hard job with high accountability, but it's still a volunteer force. They agreed to uphold that responsibility.
I have the utmost respect for police officers. They put their lives on the line. I truly believe 99% of them are great people, serving our communities.
Honestly, the problem isn't the police officers; it's the laws that allow them to get away with murder. We're always going to have bad people in the police force, in the military, in your career field... in every part of the world.
Bad people are why laws exist.
I'm just asking that they be held accountable for their actions. Most of the police officers I know agree.
And this brings us full circle. Labeling outrage or dissent as "crazy" is exactly how these conversations derail into conspiracy mud fights.
So, back to conspiracy theories...
I'm sorry I'm smart... I mean, different
My point behind what I said about conspiracy theories is this: the government and many other people want you to fall into the trap of labeling "different thinking" as a conspiracy theory.
This has led to many problems.
Here's an example:
Vaxxers versus anti-vaxxers
Three words: vaxxers, anti-vaxxers, versus. The first two words aren't the problem.
The problem is, we've labeled the anti-vaxxer group as conspiracy theorists. And plenty of them are, but this has caused the divide (can you think of any other divides in our country? I can name a few).
This has led to "vaxxers" believing all vaccines are good and "anti-vaxxers," the opposite. Neither of those things is true.
All I am asking is that you think for yourself here. If you literally just read the pamphlet the doctor hands you about whichever vaccine is in question, you’ll see that some of them are much more dangerous than helpful. That being said, plenty of them are great and necessary.
We can’t make decisions this broad; each vaccine, like each issue, deserves its own scrutiny.
Being divided into the two groups of vaxxers and anti-vaxxers is just as dangerous as the divide between conservatives and liberals.
Confirmation bias has its way with divides like this.
Often, the government feeds on this.
Think for yourself, no seriously
We should hold our political views based on what's right and what we believe in general. We shouldn't determine what's right and what we believe through the lens of our politics.
Our politics must be determined by asking essential questions first. We shouldn't answer important questions based on our politics.
When I post any of this controversial stuff on social media, I can tell commenters' political beliefs within one or two sentences. Apparently, there are "How to Be Conservative" and "How to Be Liberal" handbooks out there somewhere. I've never seen them, but people must be reading them, because it sure feels like it.
All we have to do is think for ourselves. Take the politics out of it.
I can almost guarantee you don't agree with me on everything, because my views are all over the place. Because I try my best to deep-dive into each issue and form my own beliefs, without bias. And that's great if you disagree with me. It's ok if we don't agree on everything.
We're all going to have biases no matter how hard we try not to, but acknowledging them is the beginning of intentional, open-minded thinking.
“It is never too late to give up your prejudices”
I understand some people can take open-mindedness too far and never truly form their own beliefs, but the fear of doing that has led to some of the most close-minded thinking I've ever seen.
“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.”
We just need to stand together. Love each other. Care about each other.
Stop getting so defensive. Stop letting your politics cloud your view of everything. I don't know, maybe think for a few minutes before commenting on something, and ask if you're helping the issue or pushing rhetoric, doctrine, or an agenda.
Just think for yourself.
So when it comes to what we consider conspiracy theories, don't immediately dismiss these people. Even if they were to be crazy 90% of the time, that 10% could be some of the most critical information in the world.
Nothing is ever what it seems, especially in the news, media, government... et cetera.
We just need to stop and think. Seriously, think.
Now here's a real picture I took in my backyard last night:
Footnotes
- “Conspiracy theory.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster. ↩︎
- Massara, G. "'Conspiracy theory' coined long before JFK assassination". AP News. (6 January 2023) ↩︎
- Brotherton, R. "Chapter 4". Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories. Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 978-1-4729-1564-1. (19 November 2015) ↩︎
- Butter, M. "There's a conspiracy theory that the CIA invented the term 'conspiracy theory' – here's why". The Conversation. The Conversation Trust (UK) Limited. (16 March 2020) ↩︎
- deHaven-Smith, Lance. Conspiracy Theory in America. University of Texas Press. p. 3. ISBN 978-0-292-74379-3. Archived from the original on 6 September 2016. Retrieved 27 January 2016. The term 'conspiracy theory' did not exist as a phrase in everyday American conversation before 1964. ... In 1964, the year the Warren Commission issued its report, The New York Times published five stories in which 'conspiracy theory' appeared. (15 April 2013) ↩︎
- Weedn VW, Steinberg A, Speth P. Did George Floyd Die of Cardioinhibition From Pressure on His Neck? Acad Forensic Pathol. 2025 Mar 29:19253621251327721. doi: 10.1177/19253621251327721. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 40171072; PMCID: PMC11955988. (29 March 2025) ↩︎
- Karnowski, S & Webber, T (Associated Press). Lung expert testifies George Floyd died because his breathing was restricted. PBS. (7 February 2022) ↩︎