Liberals and Progressives need to Beware of George Soros

[Alerter_]

Now that the GOP has targeted Soros for trying to oust Bush (see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x599473) Democrats might be tempted to defend Soros or think of him sympathetically. Certainly no one wants to complain that Soros is giving money to get rid of Bush. But is an enemy of Bush automatically our friend?

Soros may want to get rid of Bush, like we all do, but what about his long term plans? His rhetoric seems progressive, but is he? For critics of the DLC, it should matter that Soros was a supporter of Clark's and attacked Dean during the primaries. If Clark (who has always been an independent) had gone for the GOP, would Soros have been right behind him? And for someone who wants an "Open Society" he sure is secretive about it.

Soros' "Open Society" is warmed over "Third Way" Neo-Liberalism. Soros follows in a tradition of "liberals" like Carrol Quigley who used the rhetoric of democracy and humanism to promote a "meritocracy" of the rich and high level bureacrats in the corporate , academic, and nonprofit sectors.

Why is Soros in a position to "buy in" to the Democratic party, and even our new grassroots organizations like MoveOn? He made his fortune "arbitraging" currencies, just like Enron "arbitraging" the energy market. He has attacked the economies of Asia, and was a major player behind the Asian financial crisis in the 1990s. He promoted the US war against Serbia and used the chaos to take control of the Pristina mines. He has stated to get his way he needs to "buy governments".

His interference in the Democratic party primaries is described as "the sort that triggered the collapse of the British pound in 1992 and made Soros a demon to Asian leaders during that region's financial crisis"

http://slate.msn.com/id/2096921/

...

George Soros, high stakes financial speculator, international philanthropist, and a man of grand contradictions tells us in his final paragraph of Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism that writing it clarified his thinking on his plan for the world and led him to a clear sense of mission for his foundation network. He closes with an ominous sentence.

I shall not spell it out here because it would interfere with my flexibility in carrying it out—there is a parallel here with the problem of making public pronouncements when I was actively engaged in making money—but I can state it in general terms: to foster the civil society component of the Open Society Alliance.

This is pure Soros: Soros writing a book about Soros and his secret plan to create a global open society. It befits the outsized ego of the man who in an interview for a 1995 New Yorker profile reflected on the parallels between himself and the God of the Old Testament and observed that as a child he thought of himself as superhuman.

http://www.tikkun.org/magazine/index.cfm/action/tikkun/issue/tik0103/article/010353.html

...

If Soros wants to give money to get rid of Bush, that's fine with me. But what are we prepared to give in return? That's the unsettling question. Soros will want public assets to be "privatized" so he has a chance to buy them cheap. That's bad for America, against progressive and liberal principles, and it doesn't matter if it's dressed up in Democratic or Republican clothing.

[Speck Tater]

1. So you're syaing that...

The enemy of my enemy is my other enemy?

[Forkboy]

4. Basically,yes

Bush has Dems totally freaked,and rightfully so.But in our desire to see him gone we're making some alliances that may not be to our benefit further down the road.

For now,like most Dems,I'll welcome his help.In the long run though I'm keeping my eye on him.Politics may make strange bedfellows but that doesn't mean I'm sleeping tight next to said bedfellow :)

[The Magistrate]

46. Eyes Wide Shut, My Friend

Is indeed a better policy than it was a movie....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Jacobin]

2. Yeah. That guy that wants to spend $10 million to get rid of Smirky

and has vowed to spend every waking hour to see him defeated in November....That guy's crazy.

Oh, and he's really against the tax cuts and the end of the estate tax!! And DAMN he is in favor of legalizing pot!!! What a Freak.

I agree. Let's crucify him because we disagree with some of his positions. Drive him out of the party. He isn't pure.

[Alerter_]

5. as long as Soros get only ONE vote, that's fine with me

but when he uses his money to buy "face time" with party leaders, that's NOT okay. I'm a Democrat, in the Democratic party, that believes in Democracy: one person, one vote.

Plutocrats shouldn't be welcome in the Democratic party - that's what the GOP is for.

[Jacobin]

7. Scuse me, but

You buy face time to talk to any of these dudes, Dean included when he was running, and he's my guy.

That is a very naive statement, I'm sad to say.

[sangh0]

15. When did Soros buy "face time" with Democrats?

Or is that just another one of your baseless accusations?

[Alerter_]

31. maybe Soros the Arbitrager is really the new Ghandi/MLK all in one!

Maybe Soros is just a good old fashioned American citizen that wants to do right by the USA and get Bush out. Maybe he isn't an international financial crook who is buying his way into the Democratic party with his ill-gotten billions. Perhaps Soros didn't screw over Asia and steal - er, let me rephrase - "arbitrage" - billions from poor people in Malaysia, Indonesia, and Korea.

Maybe Soros is just pumping his billions into the Democratic party, not to gain influence, but out of the goodness of his own heart. Why not? People will believe anything.

[The Magistrate]

33. Mr. Soros, Sir

Is fine by me.

A man who could break the Bank of England must at the least be viewed as a sound judge of circumstances and character, and very very good at his work.

Support for Gen. Clark is rather a plus, in my view, as he was my own preferred candidate for President.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[wyldwolf]

36. You were a Clark supporter? YOU CAN'T BE TRUSTED!!

...at least according to Alerter_ !

[Forkboy]

55. I'm not crazy about Clark supporters either

thankfully The Magistrate and DoveTurnedHawk are there to keep me from truly hating them :)

[wyldwolf]

57. you can hate, or come close to hating, all you'd like

[Forkboy]

62. Thanks

What a guy!

[The Magistrate]

65. As You And Mr. Wolf, Sir

Both seem friends to me, perhaps you could manage to find other points of common ground...?

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Forkboy]

68. We're both voting for Kerry

that's a start :)

[The Magistrate]

70. That Is Good Enough For Me, My Friend

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[OKNancy]

64. That's alright

We don't like you either.

[Forkboy]

71. well I'm just crushed OKN

my life is no longer worth living without your love :-(

Somehow,I think we'll both survive,no?

[Alerter_]

58. I used to support Clark

back in the dark days of 2003 I thought he was our only hope. I didn't know of his connections to Soros and many of the details of the war against Serbia. Fortunately, Kerry won, and with his backing from the Kennedy faction and the new grassroots groups like MoveOn and TrueMajority we don't have to scrape and bow before the DLC types anymore. Most likely, Kerry will win in a landslide, and do well in Congress too.

Half of the Clark fans I've met are great Democrats. The hired Clark guns are ruthless, efficient political operatives, but I have little in common with them. Clark is an intelligent person, no doubt about it, but I'm glad Kerry beat him.

Plenty of Clark supporters, and former Clark supporters, can be trusted, myself included I like to think.

[wyldwolf]

59. now this is just funny

Many many people on DU feel Kerry, who is DLC, is most definitely a DLC type.

I guess opinions are like assholes.

[Alerter_]

66. you think opinions are like assholes?

Check it out, common ground we can agree on. I think opinions are like assholes too.

If I was so inclined I could come up with a million reasons why I don't like Kerry, but why would I? Kerry won the Democratic primary and he'll hopefully be able to save America from the disaster that is the Bush regime.

Kerry is a moderate, perhaps too neo-liberal for my tastes, but he certainly has my vote. I expect Kerry to win in a landslide, and old fashioned Democrats like Kennedy and Byrd to be proven correct. The DLC can help out if it wants to. I'm glad Kerry beat Clark, and I hope that Kerry remains independent of Soros and his crowd.

[wyldwolf]

69. Just remember: Kerry IS the DLC...

... they are advising his campaign. I happen to think that is a good thing. Many here don't.

..what I said about opinions... my point here isn't to start another flamefest on the DLC.

But what is funny is to listen to some trash Kerry for being DLC and then read someone trashing Clark for being DLC (he really wasn't) and praising Kerry for NOT being DLC when he is.

P.S. - Kennedy is not an old fashioned kind of dem.

[Alerter_]

72. the DLC supports Kerry because he won

Kerry wasn't the DLC's first choice - that was Lieberman and Clark - but Kerry had and still has plenty of support outside of the DLC. I'm not the conspiracy type, so the fact that Kerry is an official member (who isn't?) doesn't concern me. Kerry obviously has his own agenda that is different than the DLC, and he has plenty of support in the Democratic party, like the Kennedy's, the DNC, liberals, most progressives, and a whole lot of independents.

The DLC and the "New Democrats" can be part of the coalition but they don't get to run things anymore.

[wyldwolf]

74. Kerry has been a DLC member for years

Kerry wasn't the DLC's first choice - that was Lieberman and Clark

Yeah, Lieberman probably but there has never been any proof of the Clark-DLC thingy.

The DLC and the "New Democrats" can be part of the coalition but they don't get to run things anymore.

Not that they've ever really "ran things" but this is an another example of a strong anti-DLC statement from a DU'er, so I have to ask: Says who? Are you going to do something to see to it?

The DLC had three members in the primaries (Kerry, Lieberman, Graham), one "suspected" member (Clark) and one former member who did not split from the DLC over policy differences (Dean.)

They had some horses in the race, did they not?

[Alerter_]

78. I won't apologize for my strong anti-DLC statements

I hope Kerry dumps whatever remnants of the DLC are left in his campaign - Kerry was smart early on to distance himself from them. Look, plenty of official DLC members are just fine, and I don't think they started as a bad group, but they have consistenly failed, lost Congress, and are infiltrated by the same corporations that give more money to Bush than Kerry. Perhaps we needed them in the past, but we don't anymore. Kerry is going to clean up, and he doesn't have to "triangulate" for the corporate, pro-empire "neo-liberals" anymore. Kerry is on his way to being FDR II, just get out of the way and let it happen! :)

"there has never been any proof of the Clake-DLC thingy"

Lol! :) No proof! :bounce:

[wyldwolf]

80. I'm not asking for an apology

I hope Kerry dumps whatever remnants of the DLC are left in his campaign - Kerry was smart early on to distance himself from them.

He did? When? Gotta link? What remnants are you referring to? Foreign policy? Economics?

Look, plenty of official DLC members are just fine, and I don't think they started as a bad group, but they have consistenly failed, lost Congress, and are infiltrated by the same corporations that give more money to Bush than Kerry.

So, before '94 when Dems didn't fare well, whose fault was it then?
And if the Dems win congress back, will you credit the DLC?
How have they consistently failed? They've won the last 3 presidential contests and are on their way to a 4th.

"there has never been any proof of the Clake-DLC thingy"

Lol! :) No proof! :bounce:

Yeah. most of the points you've made were done without proof.

[crossroads]

81. Kerry seems to have gone a little right of center lately...

for my taste... but that will have to be OK, I can't handle another 4 years of Bushit!
:shrug:

[The Magistrate]

60. Do Give It A Rest, Sir

If you are going to try trotting out absurdities concerning Kossovo, it will become difficult to believe your citing the Ukrainian Nationalist swill earlier was unwitting. That would be unfortunate.

Best, Sir, to keep your eye on the enemy --- the criminals of the '00 Coup, and the need, for the good of our people and country, to drive them from the office they usurped. That, all of us here surely can agree on.

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Alerter_]

83. too bad, Magistrate

Those who justify bombing women, children, civilians, journalists, hospitals and water supplies are no freind of mine, no matter how grand their rhetoric. Foolishly intervening on the side of the terrorist KLA, the Pakistan ISI, and the Saudis - the same terrorists who attacked us on 911 - served no purpose other than to justify a neo-con/neo-liberal policy of empire labeled as "enlargement" "containment" and "democratization" - not to mention fattening the pockets of criminals like Soros.

Killing 1000 to save 1000 - ignoring the "collateral damage" - is inexcusable. The fact that atrocities had to be invented, photographs staged, and high level leaders like Albright sent out (unsuccessfully) to deceive college students into supporting imperialism, is enough to raise enough suspicion that I hope anyone unfamiliar with the situation will inform themselves, and not take the word of politicians, would-be kingmakers, and random internet posters like myself at face value.

In any case, I expect President Kerry will set a much higher standard than we have had in the past, obviously Republican but including Democrats as well. No one can question Kerry's intelligence and competence, and Kerry has already proved himself by taking on the Bush criminals in his investigations of BCCI and Iran-Contra, the very network of criminals behind 911, the war against Serbia and now Iraq. Perhaps I'm an optimist, but I have faith Kerry will come through, no matter how much some try to stop him.

"If you are going to try trotting out absurdities concerning Kossovo, it will become difficult to believe your citing the Ukrainian Nationalist swill earlier was unwitting. That would be unfortunate."

Anti-semitism is the socialism of fools, I've heard. Fascists will always try to blame a scapegoat - in America it's been the blacks, in eastern Europe it's been the Jews, and your warning to be careful rooting around in remnants of the Soviet empire was correct. I've already said I should have checked that *one* link more carefully, and not posted it. Hopefully I won't be branded forever as anti-semetic for posting the wrong Ukranian nationalist link on DU.

I guess like Dean said, we should never allow racism to divide us. Being anti-war is never racist, nor anti-semetic, nor anti-women, nor anti-labor, nor anti-human.

[The Magistrate]

85. Wear It In Good Health, Sir

Your factual errors, and interperative nonsense, in this matter, are too numerous and deep to engage in summary, and the matter does not require going into here and now with the depth it would require to do properly. There is also the danger that you would simply cling to and repeat the same swill selective nationalist readings have fed you, no matter what efforts were set up against them; most people who commence with that tired old list do so, in the many debates on the matter this forum has featured. In the final analysis, people who do not want to know better will not: you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make one think....

[Alerter_]

97. what's that, Magistrate?

Check out the responses you get when you criticize the billionaires trying to buy the democratic process.

"There is also the danger that you would simply cling to and repeat the same swill selective nationalist readings have fed you, no matter what efforts were set up against them; most people who commence with that tired old list do so, in the many debates on the matter this forum has featured."

Honestly I'd hope anyone curious about Soros just look at how his fans who "followed" his career respond to critics. Soros is a danger to us only when he wants payback - when Soros tries to push his agenda after having spent billions to influence the Democratic party - I hope everyone takes a look at the names and posting histories of his supporters. It will be interesting to see how they continue to support him when he comes calling to collect his profits.

[The Magistrate]

102. But Of Course, Sir

The item you excerpted was clearly a reference to your comments on Kossovo, and had nothing whatever to do with Mr. Soros. That sort of atomizing and stripping from context is a very poor habit, that persons of good heart and sound intellect avoid.

Your suggestionm some sort of amatuer Tcheka be turned against myself and others can be faced with perfect equinamity, and promises much amusement in future....

"To a bloody War and a sickly Season!"

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[sangha]

104. Please note that Alerter_ has yet to explain what Soros did

that was so bad. He keeps claiming that we need to be careful of Soros but he never explains why.

[Auntie Bush]

61. I'm with you , Sir.

[Alerter_]

76. why not Tony Soprano?

"A man who could break the Bank of England must at the least be viewed as a sound judge of circumstances and character, and very very good at his work."

If that's you're kind of hero, perhaps I have less in common with you than I thought. If Soros was some sort of Robin Hood character that broke the Bank of England to distribute wealth equally, I'd give the idea a second thought. But the fact that Soros is the greatest scam artist in the West doesn't make me think he's a "sound judge" of anything, except perhaps where to find the latest suckers. I'd rather have him buying off the GOP.

"Support for Gen. Clark is rather a plus, in my view, as he was my own preferred candidate for President."

Like I said, I was an early supporter of Clark, but now that I know a lot more I'm glad Kerry won. Kerry will make an exceptional President.

[JohnLocke]

79. I think you misinterperted the good judge's intentions.

"A man who could break the Bank of England must at the least be viewed as a circumstances and character, and very very good at his work."

I think The Magistrate is implying that at a very minimum, Soros must be judged to be "sound judge of circumstances and character." We can reasonably accept this because Soros became rich because of it. His many business investments of course had risks, and to succeed in them Soros had to be a "sound judge" of the "circumstances" of the market and of the "character" of the people involved in the venture. Notice that this does not mean "morality." the Magistrate would never say that being wealthy is an indicator of benevolence, as evidenced by Bush!

[The Magistrate]

82. Is He Offering The Party Substantial Sums Of Useful Cash, Sir?

Where the ammunition comes from is of much less concern to me than that it arrives where it is needed in time to assail the enemy.

There are many flaws in the trading of currency, but it is a necessary business, all things considered, and people are entitled to make their money in it, if that is where their expertise lies, just as they are in any other legal trade. "Scam artist" implies not just illegality but a process of deception about the result of a transaction, and does not apply to currency speculations, quite. The thing is much closer to book-making, and Mr. Soros is indeed a book-maker of great scale in currency betting, who has managed on occassion to beat the house, or as they are more usually called, the central banks. This takes great skill and judgement, and persons who possess these attributes are often, though not always, able to apply them to more than one field.

It is an odd effect of vast wealth, that it must be extended so widely in investment that it is often impossible for its owner to identify any narrow "special interest" that, if favored particularly, will bring him disproportionate benefit, for what helps one investment may well harm another. This leads to the realization that only the broadest improvement of economic life can likely result in any increase in total wealth, or security for that wealth, for such a person. Hence there is a basic factional split in the captitalist class, between the largest plutocrats, and those parvenues with fortunes tied to specific industries, such as oil or other raw materials, and agricultural interests, and cut-price retailing. The former tend toward more liberal views, the latter toward more reactionary ones, in economic matters. This split ought to be taken advantage of by the left.

"War requires funds, you know."

"An election bears the same resemblance to a civil war as the bloodless surrender of a force outnumbered in the field bears to Waterloo."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Alerter_]

87. Democrats are not mercenaries for hire

"Where the ammunition comes from is of much less concern to me than that it arrives where it is needed in time to assail the enemy."

You are equating political money with ammunition, correct? Democrats do not shy away from conflicts nor war. But Democrats have standards and do not resort to such disgusting atrocities as torture, sodomy, and collective punishment. We are not mercenaries that sell out our principles for money, and we don't fight for whoever gives us bullets. The Democratic party is based on one-person, one-vote, not one dollar, one vote. As for your lengthy justification of Soros' Enron arbitrage tactics, I'll leave it to the more verbose.

"War requires funds, you know."

Every tyrant in history agrees - what does that have to do with Democrats? The Democratic party is no mercenary, no whore, and not for sale. Neither is soon-to-be President Kerry.

[The Magistrate]

93. Thank You For The Chuckle, Sir

It is not easy to get me to laugh out loud, but you have managed it....

The war requires funds line, by the way, is from an interview with a Chinese guerrilla fighting Japanese in Manchuria in the summer of 1932.

"Remember that two wrongs do not make a right, but three do."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[sangha]

105. Don't laugh. Pay attention

and note how Alerter_ conflates what Clinton did in Kosovo with Soros without providing any evidence that Soros wa involved with this. This is consistent with his habit of blaming Soros for all sorts of bad things without ever explaining it.

[The Magistrate]

107. It Is Noted, My Friend

But we must take our amusement where it can be found in these dark days.

"Ridicule is an important element of popular debate, for what people have once been moved to laugh at, they can seldom be pursuaded to take seriously again."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[sangha]

103. When did Soros buy "face time" with Democrats?

Or is that just another one of your baseless accusations?

You didn't answer the question, and it's a very simple one

[Taverner]

3. Soros just wants to bet on the winning horse

When Dean was ahead, he planned to donate to him. When Dean slid, he pushed for Clark as he (like many) felt he was the man to watch.

[Jacobin]

8. Damn! Can you believe that SOB was supporting Dem candidates??!

Flog him!!

Flog him!!!

[Taverner]

12. Hey - I'd do exactly the same as he were I a billionare

Being as I want Bush out, first and foremost - I would pump $$$ into whoever looked like they were gonna win, and then continually pump that cash.

[MoonRiver]

41. EXACTLY.

I think you just hit the nail on its head.

[karabekian]

6. not to mention that he supported the Campaign Finance Reform

and now breaks it. I guess he is too rich for the rules, that he was instumental in funding, to apply to him. I agree with your sentiments but I will have to wait and see what he does. His money is not a bad thing afterall.

[AudreyT]

10. he hasn't broken CFR

he's following the law exactly like its written. He's not giving money to candidates but independent organizations.

[AudreyT]

9. The Open Society is a reference to "The Open Society and its Enemies"

by Karl Popper. It is not "is warmed over "Third Way" Neo-Liberalism" but an indictment of all supremecists ideologies since Plato. Which puts Popper and Soros, who inheirited Popper's philosophy, completely diametrically opposed the philosphy of Leo Strauss and the Neo-cons. YOu really should read the book, as well as what Soros has written and done.

[sangh0]

13. It's obvious Alerter_ didn't read what he posted

It's not the first time I've heard someone attacking a public figure with erroneous "facts" or "logic". Earlier today, we had someone who used an anti-Semitic Holocaust denying website to attack Soros with. Coincidentally, at a time when the GOP has decided to attack Soros.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1713305

[Alerter_]

17. sangh0 has been attacking me as "anti-semetic" all day - links here

I urge anyone interested to read the threads, and judge sangh0's posts for yourself:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=120x18301
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1713305
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x599473

[sangh0]

19. Everybody should read those threads

and see that while I do call the website he linked to "anti-semitic", I NEVER accused Alerter_ of being an anti-semite. His accusations against are as false as his accusations against Soros, and I welcome DUers to read the threads and decide for themselves.

[Alerter_]

23. Good, let's drop it, and let DUers read the links for themselves

Can we agree on that? The posting record is clear, we've both provided links. Let DUers decide for themselves.

[sangh0]

26. Fine with me

but I will continue posting and defending Soros. If you want to discuss Soros, I will be making sure that people know your record of credibility (or lack thereof) on this issue.

[The Magistrate]

43. In Fairness, Mr. Alerter

Only the Ukrainian Nationalist site you cited and connected to was called Anti-Semitic. That is a proper discription of it, and it is generally a poor practice to cite such locations. Indeed, it is wise to be very careful poking about in the detritus of the old Soviet Union: there are a lot of unfamiliar uglinesses left exposed there by the collapse of Soviet power....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Alerter_]

63. innuendo works as well

Pointing out a questionable or even discredited link is one thing, but "thread stalking" and broadly hinting that I'm promoting some vile agenda is quite another.

So, if you want to say that Sangh0 didn't *technically* accuse me of anti-semitism, surely you would conceed that he implied it?

The difference between, "do you always link to anti-semitic sites" and "this site is anti-semitic and not credible" is obvious to everyone?

[The Magistrate]

67. It Is A Damned Foul Site, Sir

Legitimate material can generally be found in other venues, even if conveniently quoted in such a place. It is best to explore a site thoroughly before using it as a source.

[Forkboy]

73. be that as it may,my friend

his complaint regarding the fellow DUer is correct.The poster chooses words carefully so as to not break rules.However,the implication was all too clear.

[The Magistrate]

75. True, Sir

Everyone involved ought to have been a little more careful and precise.

[Alerter_]

84. heh, try finding information about Soros, I dare you

I thought it would be easy too, but finding info about Soros is as difficult as finding info about Scaife, Beers, Moon, Koch or Riady. These billionaires who try to buy our democratic process have a surprising ability to be ignored by the corporate media. I'll admit when I'm wrong, certainly, but I won't be pressured into not asking questions.

[The Magistrate]

86. Having Followed His Career, Sir

Information does not seem scarce to me. His activities have been widely reported for years, he is often interviewed, regularly writes articles for the glossy journals, and has published the odd book or two. Open secrets are all there are in such matters, Sir.

[sangha]

106. So he says he doesn't know much about Soros, and info is hard to find

yet he is so certain that Soros is a bad influence.

[Sterling]

42. If he is mad at you you must be doing something right.

No one really takes it seriously, niether should you.

[Nlighten1]

39. Here is a wonderful link to an article by Soros the Philosopher.

http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tkpw/tcr/volume-01/

Number 1 (26-Nov-1996):
A Failed Philosopher Tries Again
George Soros


Click on this link...you have a choice of PDF or html

on edit...I hate pdf here is the HTML link

http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tkpw/tcr/volume-01/number-01/node1.html#SECTION00010000000000000000

[debsianben]

52. Beware of Karl Popper

His students always called that book "'The Open Society' By One Of Its Enemies".

[AudreyT]

94. sorry no

that was always a joke, personally Popper may have hade a hard edge and a slight ego. But it befits him. He's accomplished quite a bit.

[PurityOfEssence]

11. another firefight in the long war to prove that grey doesn't exist

Soros may be a mixed bag, but he believes in personal freedoms and a healthy society. Yes, he's a hardcore capitalist, but he's experienced life in ways most of us will never have to. The charge of this poster that he intends to privatize public assets is something I'd like to see substantiated; if he would want to initiate privatizing utilities and especially water so he can buy them up, I won't like him much either, but if he takes advantage of situations that exist, that's business. All rich people aren't dicks.

Somehow Dean is some kind of saint to this poster, and this just baffles me. To a practical man, Dean was a danger; you can count me on that list too: he's too combative, error-prone, skittish, deceptive (yes, I mean that) and unpolished to survive in prime-time. Forget about his policies for a second, he's just not up to the task. Soros thinks like that: he's causal and results-oriented.

Everyone on our side doesn't have to be our soul mate forever, and this guy's a valuable ally. Hell, if Chaing Kai-Shek and Mao Tse-Tung could bury the hatchet for over a decade to get rid of the common enemy, we can certain tolerate this guy. For his sense of Noblesse Oblige alone, he ranks up there with Roosevelt, Kerry and Dean. (Yes, that was a compliment to Dean; regardless of his origins, he "gets it" in regards to the working and starving classes. I LIKE grey areas; they smell like reality.)

[sangh0]

14. In addition, the links he cites has lots of praise for Soros

I don't see anything aside from baseless generalization that supports Alerter_'s strong distaste for Soros, and Alerter_ doesn't explain it either. Alerter_ seems to have the most baseless hostility I've yet to see on DU.

[Forkboy]

16. Oh,I dont know about that

:)

[sangh0]

21. "Soros is rightly considered a hero. "

"And in his philanthropic career, Soros has chosen admirable causes: He has given away nearly $5 billion to foster democracy in ex-Communist Europe, supporting everything from reconstruction in Bosnia to exit polls in Georgia. In Russia, where he paid stipends to tens of thousands of scientists whose state jobs collapsed along with the Soviet order, and where he fought AIDS, sponsored the independent media, and commissioned new history text books, Soros is rightly considered a hero. "

No, "hero" was meant as an insult. Right Forkboy?

[sangh0]

22. "His understanding...is all too accurate"

"Soros argues that if he had not bought Lockheed and Northrop, then somebody else would have, and Britain would have devalued sterling no matter what he did. "Bringing my social conscience into the decision-making process would make no difference in the real world; but it may adversely affect my own results." One can challenge the Soros claim that such behavior is amoral rather than immoral, but his basic argument is accurate. His understanding that it is futile to look to individual morality as the solution to the excesses of financial markets is all too accurate."


I guess for some people, "accurate" is a no-no.

[Alerter_]

89. lol! That's my favorite quote yet, sangh0!

"Soros argues that if he had not bought Lockheed and Northrop, then somebody else would have, and Britain would have devalued sterling no matter what he did."

Perhaps I'm a simpleton, but I can hardly see the difference between that and Ken Lay telling us if someone hadn't have gamed the "free market" for energy in electricity, someone else would have! Or Eisenhower telling us that we should all buy into the military-industrial complex, before someone beats us to it!

There's pragmatism, and then there's corruption. Most Americans can tell the difference :)

"His understanding that it is futile to look to individual morality as the solution to the excesses of financial markets is all too accurate."

So Soros admits he's scamming us, and his solution is to let him buy our politicians so he'll "fix" it for us? Give us a little credit, okay?

Bah, I have no doubt President Kerry will throw this wannabe-Dem version of Chalabi right out on his ass.

[AudreyT]

95. Soros doesn't scam

but he is correct when he says financial markets are ammmoral. Which is why he does what he does with his foundation and why he writes and puts money into lobbying gov'ts to take care of the needs of society that aren't going to be taken care of by a market economy.

[sangha]

108. Stop repeating untruths

Soros isn't giving money to Kerry, the DNC, or any other Democrat for that matter. He is giving it to MoveOn.org

There's pragmatism, and then there's corruption.

And you have yet to explain any corrupt activity on Soros part.

[Forkboy]

27. I was commenting on the fact

that Alerter is not the most baseless hostile person on DU.Where you decide to take it from there is up to you.

[sangh0]

28. Silly me

I thought you were commenting on the subject of the thread.

[Forkboy]

29. Like I said

take it where you want :shrug:

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

109. I did comment.Post #4...that would be before you commented BTW

Guess you missed it.

So sorry.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

18. Soros may have his own motives, but, YES, he has always....

cherished Freedom for ALL people. He escaped from Nazi Germany at the age of 10.

While our motives may not always be the same, what is important to remember that we are on the same side for the time being and that is what matters. Although Soros has NEVER been a Right Winger and he feels that the Neo-Cons are similar to the Nazis. Also, he has given away billions of dollars to good causes.

Also, as my avatar shows, I was a strong supporter of Wes Clark.
He may have made the MISTAKE of voting for Nixon, but he and Kucinich were the most Liberal/Progressive candidates running for office. Also, Clark and Clinton are VERY GOOD FREINDS!

[Alerter_]

92. as Charlotte said in "Sex and the City"

"Oh. You brought up the Holocaust. Now I'm not allowed to say anything."
...
"Soros may have his own motives, but, YES, he has always cherished Freedom for ALL people. He escaped from Nazi Germany at the age of 10."

[Alerter_]

38. I agree, Soros is a mixed bag

It's hard to complain that he is spending his money promoting MoveOn and the Democratic party. I'm a member of MoveOn, and a Democrat. I want everyone to vote for Kerry and a straight Democratic party ticket for Congress.

I don't support Soros' long term plans for America, and I don't like him interfering in the primary and the elections. I don't want billionaires buying their way into our party and bribing politicians - let me rephrase - "contributing" to politicians - and as soon as President Kerry is inaugurated Soros will not just be the enemy of my enemy but a plain old enemy.

"Somehow Dean is some kind of saint to this poster, and this just baffles me."

Lol! I always hated Dean himself (I thought he was smarmy), but the Dean fans are the future of the Democratic party and I support them 100% It's simply the fact they raised all that money in small amounts, from regular people. That's democracy in action and I totally support it. I don't support crooked billionaires who are hardly different than Ken Lay and Andrew Fastow muscling their way into our movement with their big bucks.

"Soros thinks like that: he's causal and results-oriented"

Do you know Soros? Does he sign your paychecks? ;)

[sangha]

110. More distortions about Soros

I don't support Soros' long term plans for America

Really? Then why don't you tell us what Soros' long term plans for America are? In another post, you claim there isn't much info on Soros to read, yet you imply that you know his long term plans. Care to share with the rest of us?

I don't like him interfering in the primary and the elections.

Soros "interfered" with the primaries and the election? Why don't you tell us HOW he did that? What did he do, give money? Since when is legal democratic behavior "interference"?

I don't support crooked billionaires

Soros has done something crooked? Why don't you tell us more about it?

[Joanne98]

20. He hates Bush. That makes him okay. His money too.........

[sangh0]

24. Please note the foolishness of this argument

Alerter_ doesnt mention ONE BAD THING that Soros has done. The pieces he links in do not mention anything immoral or illegal that Soros has done. Those articles, like Alerter's posts about Soros, are nothing more than speculative fear-mongering based on the reading of tea leaves and an assumption that because Soros has so much money, he must be evil.

[wyldwolf]

35. not only that, but...

...during the primaries, Clark won DU polls more often than not, so the original poster must want a lot of DU'ers shunned, too.

[Alerter_]

98. not one bad thing, except for that whole Enron style arbitraging

if you can overlook that, Soros' war profiteering, and convince yourself his attempts to purchase the Democratic party are all altruism, then sure. And Scaife funds the GOP because he's an honest conservative. The problem of corruption is bipartisan unfortunately.

[sangha]

113. More distortions from Alerter_

Please note how Alerter_ makes two accusations

1) "Enron style arbitraging" and

2) war profiteering

Also, please note how Alerter_ does not explain what Soros did. He merely labels it, and assumes we just take his word for it.

[MoonRiver]

25. With friends like Soros,

we may actually GET RID of our enemies!

Please, grow up. A big :thumbsdown: to your post.

[GeronimoSkull]

30. George Soros, Imperial Wizard

This an interesting article from Covert Action Quarterly about George Soros. It's obviously very biased against Soros but contains a lot of interesting info about him and is well-sourced. I never knew he was the owner of Harken Energy until I read this.

George Soros, Imperial Wizard
http://www.canadiandimension.mb.ca/extra/d1207hc.htm

[Alerter_]

101. great quote from your link

"Yes, I do have a foreign policy...my goal is to become the conscience of the world."

This is not a case of narcissistic personality disorder; this is how George Soros exercises the authority of United States hegemony in the world today. Soros foundations and financial machinations are partly responsible for the destruction of socialism in Eastern Europe and the former USSR. He has set his sights on China. He was part of the full court press that dismantled Yugoslavia. Calling himself a philanthropist, billionaire George Soros' role is to tighten the ideological stranglehold of globalization and the New World Order while promoting his own financial gain. Soros' commercial and "philanthropic" operations are clandestine, contradictory and coactive. And as far as his economic activities are concerned, by his own admission, he is without conscience; a capitalist who functions with absolute amorality. "

[wyldwolf]

32. "liberals" and "prooogreeessiiives" need to beware of Michael Moore...,

...countless other people, as well as many of us here on DU.

We supported Clark, too.

Paranoia runs rampant still at DU.

[bicentennial_baby]

34. Plutocrats R' Us

:puke:

[Piperay]

40. YES...'the enemy of my enemy

IS my friend'. After we get rid of the enemy (chimp) things can be hashed out.

[Sterling]

44. Liberals and Progressives need to Beware of everybody these days.

I would even watch my back with some posters on this board, lol.

[The Magistrate]

48. Apparently, Mr. Sterling

They need to be particularly beware of liberals and progressives. After all, the disaster of victory seems to be looming ahead: that must be avoided at all costs....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Nlighten1]

45. Sir Karl Popper - George Soros link.

This is a nice read if you have time

http://www.eeng.dcu.ie/~tkpw/tcr/volume-01/number-01/node1.html#SECTION00010000000000000000

[in_cog_ni_to]

47. Please, please, please

don't crucify Soros. Our party is lucky to have him.

[Eric J in MN]

49. Let's worry about all this after November (nt)

nt

[Q]

50. Soros isn't asking for anything in return...

...and he's not in a position to influence US or Democratic policy.

- A hit piece by any other name is still a hit piece. I find you more suspect than Soros.

[democracyindanger]

51. "Interference in the Dem party primaries"?

Nice try.

The actual quote is, "He prepared to back his hunch with millions of dollars in speculative wagers, the sort that triggered the collapse of the British pound in 1992 and made Soros a demon to Asian leaders during that region's financial crisis."

The "hunch" in the editorial is "Contemplating a popular president preparing an invasion of Iraq, Soros was shocked but unwilling to be awed: He believed that this show of American supremacy was a bubble waiting to be pricked and that the president's popularity could be made to pop with it."

The "wagers" are/were donations to John Podesta's liberal think tank, a grant to a Democratic get-out-the-vote effort and money for MoveOn.org. It's too bad you believe that supporting the Center for American Progress, America Coming Together and MoveOn.org qualifies as 'interfering' with the Dem primaries.

Damn you MoveOn! :eyes:

[Alerter_]

96. I'm a contributing member of MoveOn

But of course, I have none of the billions that Soros has, just one random citizen.

[sangha]

111. Please note how there is no explanation of Soros' "interference"

and how even when challenged, the claim that there was "interference" isn't defended. Maybe becuase it never happened

[delhurgo]

53. Soros is a capitalist and a businessman!!!

Horrors!!! He runs businesses and makes alot of money. What an evil, evil man. LOL. I can't believe the pinkos that post here.

[Bridget Burke]

54. I'm a pinko & I think Soros is OK.

Do I trust him 100%? No.

Do I trust ANYBODY 100%? Guess the answer.

Somebody who's made a bunch of money but retains good taste in politicians is a fine with me.

[Hammie]

56. Actually Soros kind of Creeps me out.

The idea that the guy is possibly rich enough to buy the outcome of the election doesn't sit well with me.

Where do the people win if one guy can determine the who wins by which side he decides to back in the election. And not because he himself has the respect of the electorate but because his money overpowers the other side.

Sure it is better that he's on our side, this time, but if things really work the way Soros is betting that they do, then democracy is a farce.

[mopinko]

77. another circular firing squad

i see. get over it people. find common ground. don't quibble.
fuck purity.

[durutti]

88. self deteted

[John_H]

90. No, FREEPERS need to be wary of George Soros 'cause

he's going to help us relocate them to the shitholes they crawled out of.

[West Coast Democrat]

91. I'm not convinced....

by what you're saying.

[Alerter_]

99. good, judge for yourself

Watch Soros, and pay attention to what payback he tries to get after we win.

[Justice]

100. Hmmm, A Slate Article that seeks to cast doubt on Soros' intentions....

Soros said that he has concluded that the single most important thing he can do is to help oust Bush from office.

that is good enough (and quite enough) for me.

[robbedvoter]

112. Wha? Air America, Randi Rhodes chopped liver ? Stab Soros now?

How long until you target MoveOn? Do you enjoy biting your own tail?
Cutting the branch you are standing on? Could be possible to contain your confusion, self destruction tendencies for yourself? Your signature enemy list is pathological enough - do we need threads for each of your obsessions now?