> Anyone who is part of ISIS, and assists them in any meaningful way, is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder [...] so anyone materially assisting ISIS can be

> Anyone who is part of ISIS, and assists them in any meaningful way, is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder [...] so anyone materially assisting ISIS can be convicted and sentenced to death (or what ever is the punishment for capital crime in a given jurisdiction) without inventing new laws The article argues explicitly against that reasoning, for the record: > After all, in a government or other large social community there exists among the top officials, civilian and military, together with their financial and industrial collaborators, a kind of over-all working arrangement which may always be looked upon, if its invidious connotation be disregarded, as a "conspiracy." That is, government implies "breathing together." And is everyone who, knowing the purposes of the party in power, participates in government or joins with officials to be held for every act of the government? > To take a case which is perhaps not so obvious, is everyone who joins a political party, even one with some illegal purposes, to be held liable to the world for the action that every member takes, even if that action is not declared in the party platform and was not known to or consented to by the person charged as a wrongdoer? To put upon any individual such responsibility for action of the group seems literally to step back in history to a point before the prophet Ezekiel and to reject the more recent religious and democratic teachings that guilt is personal.