Tweet
I've seen some of your sources, man, and read them and what I saw was a few facts sewn together with a whole lot of speculation and personal interpretation man. It also seemed to come from a particularly Americo-centric perspective of history though, which is possibly why it didn't fall on very fertile soil with me.
Not quite sure what 'older 'times you mean, man, but believe me there's nothing new about conspiratorial and/or paranoid ideas and writings. Age doesn't imply accuracy. That said without having investigated thoroughly I won't dismiss anything out of hand either. I've read enough history to be able to offer some very different takes on at least some of the facts presented and the offers there if you wanted me to go over 'em in more detail for a critique and some of the issues I picked up on.
EDIT: Interesting read here that touches on some of the history of conspriatorialism and paranoia in the US political arena, read it a few months back researching something else entirely but you might find it interesting.
Also this article on a book I seriously want to read about the relationships between the oil independents and their funding of christian fundamentalism and their battle with the likes of the Rockefellers and the funding of modernism - a divide which is clearly relevent in todays politics I think and also ghas a bearing on some of the beliefs you hold I think.
Nothing happens in a vacuum man, those ideas, those beliefs you have, someone is pushing them, someone is promoting them...someone put 'em on a website espousing home education and a traditional white christian progession of history behind a button labelled 'SECRETS' knowing that that's the best way of drawing attention to 'em. You think that ish just got there by accident? Your enemies enemy ain't necessarily your friend, man.
And Soros... have you looked at his funding programs and where he puts his money? I have... it was, ironically, one of those right leaning 'leaks' types sites, accessed via wayback and partially redacted, spent half a day digging up old - supposedly hidden - files from an internal report showing he supoorts groups similar to *** in the US or whatever... but I also looked at what he funds internationally. Dude gives money to organisations supporting persecuted and disadvantaged groups the world over mainly, that and to supporting and strengthening independent judiciaries in countries where the legal system is essentially used as a tool of state power.
Ain't really surprised there's a few auithoritarian states like Hungary really don't like him or just straight banned him... but those are the folk I tend to consider the bad guys. So whilst it is un********ic and I consider there's gotta be something fundamentally wrong with a society which can concentrate that degree of wealth and power into one pair of hands I'm actually struggling to see what the guy's doing that's led to him being painted as some agent of evil.
Not quite sure what 'older 'times you mean, man, but believe me there's nothing new about conspiratorial and/or paranoid ideas and writings. Age doesn't imply accuracy. That said without having investigated thoroughly I won't dismiss anything out of hand either. I've read enough history to be able to offer some very different takes on at least some of the facts presented and the offers there if you wanted me to go over 'em in more detail for a critique and some of the issues I picked up on.
EDIT: Interesting read here that touches on some of the history of conspriatorialism and paranoia in the US political arena, read it a few months back researching something else entirely but you might find it interesting.
Also this article on a book I seriously want to read about the relationships between the oil independents and their funding of christian fundamentalism and their battle with the likes of the Rockefellers and the funding of modernism - a divide which is clearly relevent in todays politics I think and also ghas a bearing on some of the beliefs you hold I think.
Nothing happens in a vacuum man, those ideas, those beliefs you have, someone is pushing them, someone is promoting them...someone put 'em on a website espousing home education and a traditional white christian progession of history behind a button labelled 'SECRETS' knowing that that's the best way of drawing attention to 'em. You think that ish just got there by accident? Your enemies enemy ain't necessarily your friend, man.
And Soros... have you looked at his funding programs and where he puts his money? I have... it was, ironically, one of those right leaning 'leaks' types sites, accessed via wayback and partially redacted, spent half a day digging up old - supposedly hidden - files from an internal report showing he supoorts groups similar to *** in the US or whatever... but I also looked at what he funds internationally. Dude gives money to organisations supporting persecuted and disadvantaged groups the world over mainly, that and to supporting and strengthening independent judiciaries in countries where the legal system is essentially used as a tool of state power.
Ain't really surprised there's a few auithoritarian states like Hungary really don't like him or just straight banned him... but those are the folk I tend to consider the bad guys. So whilst it is un********ic and I consider there's gotta be something fundamentally wrong with a society which can concentrate that degree of wealth and power into one pair of hands I'm actually struggling to see what the guy's doing that's led to him being painted as some agent of evil.
"He argued that the Populist movement of the 1890s was deeply irrational and essentially proto-*******. The Populists saw the principal source of injustice and economic suffering in rural America in what they called “the money power.” In Hofstadter’s analysis, this was evidence of irrational paranoia, of “psychic disturbances.”
Moreover, Hofstadter argued that these denunciations of “the money power” were deeply anti-Semitic. Alas, his evidence of Populist anti-Semitism was embarrassingly thin: a handful of lurid quotes from a few Populist leaders about the “House of Rothschild” and “Shylock,” and an argument that Henry Ford’s anti-Semitism came from his background as “a Michigan farm boy who had been *******ly exposed to Populist notions.”
It never sits sell with me when complaints against the moneyed elite get shut down because of "anti-Semitism." And it also isn't cool that the people who bring it up must be somehow paranoid or disturbed.
I wish more historians would leave ***ishnes aside and just analyze if the big banking houses are doing what they are accused of. Are the accusations true or not? That's all that should matter.
Show me a historian who does that and I'll be more inclined to listen to their arguments.
Gonna green K you for the morning chuckle, man. Let it not be said you're lacking in chutzpah.
Comment