|
"The Conspiracy Theory of History Revisited" by Murray Rothbard
Far be it from me to endorse an Anarcho-Capitalism, to me that's the
ultimate in doublethink, but ol' Murray was right on the money, so to
speak, with this one.
As my Great Aunts used to say: "the true is the true", no matter whose
mouth it issues from and one has to be some kind of damn fool to
reject the truth just because it comes from someone who is not our
favorite political flavor.
http://www.mises.org/story/2809
Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat, Israel
DoreenDotan@gmail.com
|
| |
| |
Visual Purple wrote:
"The Conspiracy Theory of History Revisited" by Murray Rothbard
Far be it from me to endorse an Anarcho-Capitalism, to me that's the
ultimate in doublethink, but ol' Murray was right on the money, so to
speak, with this one.
As my Great Aunts used to say: "the true is the true", no matter whose
mouth it issues from and one has to be some kind of damn fool to
reject the truth just because it comes from someone who is not our
favorite political flavor.
http://www.mises.org/story/2809
He was doing so well until he got to that bugbear of old conspiracy
nuts, the Trilateral Commission. Has the dreaded TC picked any
presidents since Carter? Their man, Mondale, lost in 1984. How do you
explain that?
--Jeff
--
It is only those who have neither
fired a shot nor heard the shrieks
and groans of the wounded who cry
aloud for blood, more vengeance, more
desolation. War is hell.
--William Tecumseh Sherman
|
| |
| |
"Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Turner <jturner@localnet.com> writes:
Jeffrey> He was doing so well until he got to that bugbear of old
Jeffrey> conspiracy nuts, the Trilateral Commission. Has the
Jeffrey> dreaded TC picked any presidents since Carter? Their
Jeffrey> man, Mondale, lost in 1984. How do you explain that?
The point isn't that there's a particular organization that runs the
world by choosing presidents and so on. It's that international elites
cooperate for their own purposes, and that networks of cooperation
sometimes give rise to concrete arrangements for consultation like the
TC or the World Economic Forum. When they do it suggests close ties
and a lot of cooperation. It's worth noting that Bush I and Clinton
are both TC members, as is Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Alan Greenspan
and many others. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateral_Commission
--
Free Inquiries | Let's Talk!
http://inquiries.blogdns.com:8081
|
| |
| |
Thomas wrote:
"Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Turner <jturner@localnet.com> writes:
Jeffrey> He was doing so well until he got to that bugbear of old
Jeffrey> conspiracy nuts, the Trilateral Commission. Has the
Jeffrey> dreaded TC picked any presidents since Carter? Their
Jeffrey> man, Mondale, lost in 1984. How do you explain that?
The point isn't that there's a particular organization that runs the
world by choosing presidents and so on. It's that international elites
cooperate for their own purposes,
Not all of them. But cooperating is a lot different than conspiring.
Do you want to argue that Reagan, not a TC member, was less a supporter
of elite interests than Carter or Mondale?
and that networks of cooperation
sometimes give rise to concrete arrangements for consultation like the
TC or the World Economic Forum. When they do it suggests close ties
and a lot of cooperation. It's worth noting that Bush I and Clinton
are both TC members, as is Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Alan Greenspan
and many others. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateral_Commission
"Membership is divided into numbers proportionate to each of its three
regional areas. These members include corporate CEOs, politicians of all
major parties, distinguished academics, university presidents, labor
union leaders and not-for-profits involved in overseas philanthropy.
Members who gain a position in their respective country's government
must resign from the Commission."
Uh oh, those elitist union leaders and non-profit NGO leaders are in on
subjugating the world. I realize we're not talking about the Wobblies,
but still, I have my doubts about the nefarious nature of the TC.
--Jeff
--
It is only those who have neither
fired a shot nor heard the shrieks
and groans of the wounded who cry
aloud for blood, more vengeance, more
desolation. War is hell.
--William Tecumseh Sherman
|
| |
| |
"Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Turner <jturner@localnet.com> writes:
international elites cooperate for their own purposes,
Jeffrey> But cooperating is a lot different than conspiring.
Don't understand the point. One slides into another. Cooperation is
soft conspiracy that's likely out in the open, conspiracy organized
cooperation that's somewhat behind the scenes. There's not much
difference in principle, and how much you'll find of each depends on
circumstances. Neither is crazier than the other.
Look: it's commonplace that those of a common trade like to get
together if they can to arrange things to make their lives easier.
Adam Smith said as much. So did the men who drafted the Sherman
Antitrust Act. They even talked about conspiracies in restraint of
trade. Were they all crackpots?
Running big countries is a trade. Ditto for running global business.
Why wouldn't people in those trades get together to arrange things to
suit themselves? And if they notoriously get together, at Davos or
wherever, to discuss common concerns why shouldn't the rest of us take
an interest and get a bit suspicious about what's going on? That's the
way we'd feel if it were shoe manufacturers.
Jeffrey> I have my doubts about the nefarious nature of the TC.
They take the point of view of those in a particular trade. If you
think the trade they're in has the same interests as the rest of us,
for example if you think it would be good to have lots of global
administrators running things in the way that makes sense to them,
then you won't worry. If you have doubts about that way of doing
things you'll have some questions.
--
Free Inquiries | Let's Talk!
http://inquiries.blogdns.com:8081
|
| |
| |
Thomas wrote:
"Jeffrey" == Jeffrey Turner <jturner@localnet.com> writes:
international elites cooperate for their own purposes,
Jeffrey> But cooperating is a lot different than conspiring.
Don't understand the point. One slides into another. Cooperation is
soft conspiracy that's likely out in the open, conspiracy organized
cooperation that's somewhat behind the scenes. There's not much
difference in principle, and how much you'll find of each depends on
circumstances. Neither is crazier than the other.
Look: it's commonplace that those of a common trade like to get
together if they can to arrange things to make their lives easier.
Adam Smith said as much. So did the men who drafted the Sherman
Antitrust Act. They even talked about conspiracies in restraint of
trade. Were they all crackpots?
Running big countries is a trade. Ditto for running global business.
I think you're stretching things. All the members of the TC are not
involved in either of those things.
Why wouldn't people in those trades get together to arrange things to
suit themselves? And if they notoriously get together, at Davos or
wherever, to discuss common concerns why shouldn't the rest of us take
an interest and get a bit suspicious about what's going on? That's the
way we'd feel if it were shoe manufacturers.
They're not shoe manufacturers. The TC probably could be more open and
democratic, but that doesn't mean if fits into what the topic of the
original paper was exploring. You may want to look back at the Subject
line.
Jeffrey> I have my doubts about the nefarious nature of the TC.
They take the point of view of those in a particular trade. If you
think the trade they're in has the same interests as the rest of us,
for example if you think it would be good to have lots of global
administrators running things in the way that makes sense to them,
then you won't worry. If you have doubts about that way of doing
things you'll have some questions.
What trade are the members of the TC in? It's obviously not a
democratic organization, but from the given description it is more
diverse than the Heritage Foundation or even the Brookings Institute.
For that matter, it may be more diverse than the U.S. Congress - or
at least the Senate. I'm all for openness and democratic institutions,
but there are far more serious threats, IMO, than the TC. We would have
been better off if the TC candidate had won in 1980, in my estimation.
--Jeff
--
It is only those who have neither
fired a shot nor heard the shrieks
and groans of the wounded who cry
aloud for blood, more vengeance, more
desolation. War is hell.
--William Tecumseh Sherman
|
| |
| |
|
