Deletion of State Crimes Against Democracy

Comment: Although I do not feel qualified to comment on what threshold for notability such concepts in the social "sciences" must meet, there are over one hundred https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22State+Crimes+Against+Democracy%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C33&as_sdtp= Google scholar references that discuss this concept.  Many of these are independent of the subject, published in the peer-reviewed ''American Behavioral Scientist'', a journal with a reasonably high impact factor.  They seem to me to be secondary sources that are independent of the original author, that are reliable under the rather high standards even of .  But as I said, I am not really qualified to assess these sources in a deeper way, other than to indicate their existence, and ''apparent'' reliability under our usual sourcing guidelines
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:SCHOLARSHIP)

Comment: It's a |COATRACK for the |promotion of |Fringe Theories. The sources also appear to be overwhelmingly FRINGE and thus fail RS
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Coatrack articles (WP:COATRACK||WP:PROFRINGE||WP:FRINGE)

Comment: Quite a bit of  used to make a fringe theory/term coined by Lance deHaven-Smith sound like it has mainstream traction. For example, the first sentence defining the term is sourced to Lance deHaven-Smith and Laurie Manwell, a 911 Truth advocate, but presented as the opinion of unspecified "scholars". Then a bunch of reliable sources that assert "crimes have been committed by government officials in the past" is used to bolster their theory. The https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=State_Crimes_Against_Democracy&oldid=721046638 pre-TNT version has many more examples of the synthetic argument being made by the article. If I had time, I would check all the non-fringe/non-deHaven-Smith sources to see that they actually discuss the topic as presented
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTHESIS)