Abstract
The term "conspiracy movements" has been mentioned in passing in a variety of texts, but it has yet to be defined. This article defines and critically examines the assumption that conspiracy theorists are too unorganized to "qualify" for movement status. It is suggested that invariant or state-centric theoretical models have obscured conspiracy activism and opts for an approach rooted in multi-institutional politics and New Social Movement theory. This article argues that by introducing conspiracy theories that directly conflict with the official explanation of an event or circumstance, conspiracy activists pose fundamental challenges to the meaning systems that support epistemic authorities.