This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.
| This is a Wikipedia
user page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user in whose space this page is located may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Valjean/Collusion_vs_Conspiracy. |
Maybe for here: Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard and/or an article.
Misuse of "conspiracy theory" when we really mean "hoax"
I'm wondering if we sometimes should use different titles and terminologies. The first paragraph at hoax is:
A hoax is a widely publicised falsehood so fashioned as to invite reflexive, unthinking acceptance by the greatest number of people of the most varied social identities and of the highest possible social pretensions to gull its victims into putting up the highest possible social currency in support of the hoax. [1]
The following fit our definition of a hoax very precisely.
Trump "stolen election" hoax
- Voter fraud conspiracy theories like Trump's Big Lie of a stolen election that continues to inspire the Election denial movement in the United States. This is a hoax, and we should have an article entitled something like Trump "stolen election" hoax.
"No Trump–Russia collusion" hoax
Brennan did not say there was no evidence of collusion. He made clear he had been alarmed by the extent of contacts between the Trump team and Moscow....Brennan stressed repeatedly that collusion may have been unwitting, at least at first as Russian intelligence was deft at disguising its approaches to would-be agents. "Frequently, individuals on a treasonous path do not even realize they're on that path until it gets to be too late", he said.
- "Ex-CIA chief: Trump staff had enough contact with Russia to justify FBI inquiry" [2]
- Fringe " Russiagate" claims that there was "no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia". This hoax is discussed at Mueller report#Conspiracy or coordination vs collusion. The hoax deliberately conflates "collusion" with "conspiracy", even though Mueller very specifically and carefully explained they were not synonyms, and that he only focused "conspiracy" and never once claimed there was no "collusion". The hoaxers then run with "no proof of conspiracy" and claim there was no "collusion", even though Mueller found many forms. An article entitled "No Trump–Russia collusion" hoax would be good to have.
- "Democrats [were] much more likely than Republicans to believe that Trump colluded with Russia and obstructed justice."
- Clapper: "I didn't know about Papadopoulos, Trump Tower meetings when I said there was no Trump-Russia collusion" [3]
- Steele dossier: The dossier's 17 reports allege that Trump campaign members and Russian operatives had conspired to cooperate in Russia's election interference to benefit Trump: "there was an extensive and "well-developed conspiracy of co-operation between [the Trump campaign] and the Russian leadership"
- There was "cooperation", even though "conspiracy" was unproven.
- Search: Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections for collud and collusion. Many statements for and against.
References
- ^ Tattersall, Ian; Névraumont, Peter (2018). Hoax: A History of Deception; 5,000 Years of Fakes, Forgeries, and Fallacies. Running Press. ISBN 9780316503709 – via Google Books.
- ^ Borger, Julian (May 23, 2017). "Ex-CIA chief: Trump staff had enough contact with Russia to justify FBI inquiry". The Guardian. Retrieved April 25, 2018.
- ^ Bertrand, Natasha (November 12, 2017). "James Clapper: I didn't know about Papadopoulos, Trump Tower meetings when I said there was no Trump-Russia collusion". Business Insider. Retrieved January 19, 2024.