It occurs to me that this is another notch on the list of reasons why billionaires should not exist. By virtue of their mere existence, this kind of campaign works. Any billionaire will have...
It occurs to me that this is another notch on the list of reasons why billionaires should not exist.
By virtue of their mere existence, this kind of campaign works. Any billionaire will have investments and interests in a multitude of companies and organizations the world over, no matter their actual goals. However the odds of the average person taking the time to comprehensively understand that portfolio and it's impact are very low. So instead, you have whatever PR they put out. Remember when Bill Gates was a terrible monopolistic capitalist? Of course not, now he's a philanthropist.
Except now instead of needing only to maintain a certain level of PR goodwill, Gates might be finding himself in a position similar to Soros. A focused, inflammatory campaign designed not to destroy Gates, but to give voters an "other". And because he is a billionaire, his wealth gives him power and influence at a scale that is ambiguous or even magical to most people. And so he starts being attributed near-mystical abilities (microchips in vaccines, etc).
It seems to me that any powerful person or organization that people have heard of could have conspiracies spun about it? "It could become the target of a conspiracy" isn't really an argument for...
It seems to me that any powerful person or organization that people have heard of could have conspiracies spun about it? "It could become the target of a conspiracy" isn't really an argument for anything other than avoiding fame and keeping a low profile.
Memes go viral for dumb reasons. Anyone can become a target, but the odds go up the more stuff you do in public. But fame and influence can also be used for good, so some people have to take that chance, if they want to accomplish stuff.
It's easy to see why. These people would not act philanthropically of they were billionaires, so it is impossible for them to understand philanthropy. This lack of empathy is directly evident in...
It's easy to see why. These people would not act philanthropically of they were billionaires, so it is impossible for them to understand philanthropy. This lack of empathy is directly evident in most of the assholes of the world, and is a big part of ask of our biggest problems.
I wouldn't put Soros in the same camp as Gates though. He did just straight up loot over a billion dollars from the English economy on black Wednesday, he's basically the poster child for currency...
I wouldn't put Soros in the same camp as Gates though. He did just straight up loot over a billion dollars from the English economy on black Wednesday, he's basically the poster child for currency manipulation. I don't think Microsoft under Gates, including policies like EEE, are really comparable.
I'm not an expert in this, but the problem with calling that "manipulation" is that the UK central bank was definitely manipulating the currency to keep exchange rates stable. So, you have to...
I'm not an expert in this, but the problem with calling that "manipulation" is that the UK central bank was definitely manipulating the currency to keep exchange rates stable. So, you have to decide which manipulation is good and which is bad. Arguably, trying to maintain a stable exchange rate was just bad for the UK, because sometimes devaluing your currency can improve the economy by making exports more competitive. So, you could say Soros forced them to abandon a bad policy, while profiting greatly from this.
I find the irony of the "George Soros is an evil Jew" thing being created by two Republican Jews hilarious. I don't mean to make light of the badness that has just come from this, but it's just...
I find the irony of the "George Soros is an evil Jew" thing being created by two Republican Jews hilarious. I don't mean to make light of the badness that has just come from this, but it's just too ironic.
Maybe it's some sort of selective bias on my part, but I'm finding that at least in current American politics as far back as 70 years (I can't speak for further back) we're seeing the worst actors doing the things they accuse "the enemy" of doing. In a way, the guys who strategized the anti-Soros thing are the "Jewish cabal pulling the strings from the background," they are Jewish, they are strategists, and as their job requires, most of their work is behind the scenes, and can be demonstrated to be damaging to American democracy. The House Un-American Activities Committee were the authoritarian thought police incriminating people for not conforming to their political ideology similar to what was happening in the Soviet Union. Or you can find anything Trump has done in an angry tweet he made exaggerating something Obama did. In all situations, their constituents are being successfully distracted from the real problem, their leader being a bad actor.
It occurs to me that this is another notch on the list of reasons why billionaires should not exist.
By virtue of their mere existence, this kind of campaign works. Any billionaire will have investments and interests in a multitude of companies and organizations the world over, no matter their actual goals. However the odds of the average person taking the time to comprehensively understand that portfolio and it's impact are very low. So instead, you have whatever PR they put out. Remember when Bill Gates was a terrible monopolistic capitalist? Of course not, now he's a philanthropist.
Except now instead of needing only to maintain a certain level of PR goodwill, Gates might be finding himself in a position similar to Soros. A focused, inflammatory campaign designed not to destroy Gates, but to give voters an "other". And because he is a billionaire, his wealth gives him power and influence at a scale that is ambiguous or even magical to most people. And so he starts being attributed near-mystical abilities (microchips in vaccines, etc).
It seems to me that any powerful person or organization that people have heard of could have conspiracies spun about it? "It could become the target of a conspiracy" isn't really an argument for anything other than avoiding fame and keeping a low profile.
Memes go viral for dumb reasons. Anyone can become a target, but the odds go up the more stuff you do in public. But fame and influence can also be used for good, so some people have to take that chance, if they want to accomplish stuff.
I definitely wouldn't consider Bill Gates the least vile. I appreciate that you didn't make any effort to suggest they're not all vile though.
It's easy to see why. These people would not act philanthropically of they were billionaires, so it is impossible for them to understand philanthropy. This lack of empathy is directly evident in most of the assholes of the world, and is a big part of ask of our biggest problems.
I wouldn't put Soros in the same camp as Gates though. He did just straight up loot over a billion dollars from the English economy on black Wednesday, he's basically the poster child for currency manipulation. I don't think Microsoft under Gates, including policies like EEE, are really comparable.
I'm not an expert in this, but the problem with calling that "manipulation" is that the UK central bank was definitely manipulating the currency to keep exchange rates stable. So, you have to decide which manipulation is good and which is bad. Arguably, trying to maintain a stable exchange rate was just bad for the UK, because sometimes devaluing your currency can improve the economy by making exports more competitive. So, you could say Soros forced them to abandon a bad policy, while profiting greatly from this.
But I'm wondering who lost from this trade?
I find the irony of the "George Soros is an evil Jew" thing being created by two Republican Jews hilarious. I don't mean to make light of the badness that has just come from this, but it's just too ironic.
Maybe it's some sort of selective bias on my part, but I'm finding that at least in current American politics as far back as 70 years (I can't speak for further back) we're seeing the worst actors doing the things they accuse "the enemy" of doing. In a way, the guys who strategized the anti-Soros thing are the "Jewish cabal pulling the strings from the background," they are Jewish, they are strategists, and as their job requires, most of their work is behind the scenes, and can be demonstrated to be damaging to American democracy. The House Un-American Activities Committee were the authoritarian thought police incriminating people for not conforming to their political ideology similar to what was happening in the Soviet Union. Or you can find anything Trump has done in an angry tweet he made exaggerating something Obama did. In all situations, their constituents are being successfully distracted from the real problem, their leader being a bad actor.