This opinion piece explores the growing tendency of political commentators and media to label critical perspectives as 'conspiracy theories,' particularly in light of the Epstein scandal. The author highlights how this rhetorical shift often serves to protect elites from scrutiny while simultaneously undermining valid critiques. As details of the Epstein case continue to unfold and generate significant media coverage, this caution against 'conspiracy thinking' raises concerns about its potential to stifle legitimate discourse.

Within the context of the Epstein case, which has escalated to global prominence, the article notes an escalating skepticism among the public towards elites, particularly in France. The discussion touches on the idea that cautionary phrases like 'Let’s not descend into conspiracy theories!' or 'Let’s not play into the hands of conspiracy theorists!' are becoming common, but these warnings can also obscure genuine issues of accountability among those in power. The author argues that while conspiracies undoubtedly exist, the habitual dismissal of dissenting views as 'conspiracy' may hinder important discussions regarding systemic corruption and abuse.

The piece ultimately questions whether the term 'conspiracy theory' is being weaponized to disqualify critical thought in the public sphere. By examining how language is used in the discourse surrounding the Epstein case, the author calls for a more nuanced understanding of the issues at hand, especially when societal trust in institutions continues to erode. This analysis reveals the delicate balance between validating legitimate concerns and preventing the spread of unfounded conspiracy theories, highlighting the need for responsible dialogue.