Conspiracy is Not to be Admitted Under any Stinking  Circuses

By Edward Minton *

If men associate together for anti-social purposes, what are we permitted to call this state of association?

Clearly we cannot call it a “conspiracy” or we will be dismissed as “conspiracy theorists”.

Either we must deny that any such associations ever exist or are possible, a proposition which no Court would allow, or another word must be found.

Perhaps the word “noughtiracy” might suffice; in other words the association has a naughty intent; one which is anti-social. This does not imply that it intends to destroy all human wellbeing or impose a world hegemony, or is motivated by a conscious diabolical pursuit of evil of vast measure, of course, but it allows the possibility of saying that human association with a measure of anti-social intent is sometimes identifiable, though not of course with any allegation of conspiracy being associated with it. Noughtiracy is the much gentler word for those of delicate sensibilities.

Of course it must be allowed that there are differing degrees and definitions of noughtiracy and the “C” word. Some believe that the “C” thing only exists when people associate together  in secret for anti-social purposes. This places Nazism and Communism outside of any “C” connotation as all was done in the open. Yes it is different in degree and scale, but not in principle to the players on a football field biffing each other in full view of all the spectators. It is a sort of biffing with a capital “B” perhaps, but is not con “C” ing surely.

Three or more hardened criminals associating secretly together to rob the local store have henceforth been designated as acting in “conspiracy”. This is unfortunate and is the germ from which “conspiracy theory” burgeoned. Let us not speak of it thus; it is merely “covert-noughtiracy” and nothing more.

Defining “anti-social” can be a bit tricky also. For example how are we to think of men secretly planning and executing the robbery of a bank. Apart from bankruptcies, theft from banks is pretty much the only time that credit is ever issued debt free into society. Those who advocate a national dividend for all when economies are profitable, may disagree with the methodology, but cannot see the result of successful bank robbery as being anti-social in all respects. I suppose it must be said that they are a-bit-of-a-noughtiracy.

You will have noticed that when we were told that about twenty Afghans organized themselves in a cave to steel planes and bring down the twin towers, that this was not described as a conspiracy theory. If as many terrorists secretly detonated a stolen atomic bomb in New York and killed millions of people and started a world war, this too would not of course constitute a conspiracy; just another group of noughtiracists, though naughtier than most, it is true.

According to the post-modernist view, “good” and “evil” are simply terms of either vilification, or alternately an attempt to identify and exult a higher moral purpose. Such concepts as these can only emanate from value judgments, and these must be judged as highly suspect in the absence of absolutes which are now in the eyes of many, largely discredited.

In short, if conspiracy is associating together for evil purposes, it is a proven impossibility now that evil is agreed by a self-appointed coterie, not to exist.

·       Poor Edward must be regarded as somewhat challenged by his age these days.  Surely he meant “under any circum stanceses” and not stinking circuses at all.