??? 
Posted on 04/05/2008 12:54:00 PM PDT by knarf
I found an on line full text.
"FDR once said "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." He was in a good position to know. We believe that many of the major world events that are shaping our destinies occur because somebody or somebodies have planned them that way. If we were merely dealing with the law of avenges, half of the events affecting our nation's well-being should be good for America. If we were dealing with mere incompetence, our leaders should occasionally make a mistake in our favor. We shall attempt to prove 'bat we are not really dealing with coincidence or stupidity, but with planning and brilliance. This small book deals with that planning and brilliance and how it has shaped the foreign and domestic policies of the last six administrations. We hope it will explain matters which have up to now seemed inexplicable; that it will bring into sharp focus images which have been obscured by the landscape painters of the mass media."
(Excerpt) Read more at reactor-core.org ...
Marx’s book is better, Karl not Harpo.
We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.~Winston Churchill (1874-1965)
“How do you tell a Socialist:- It’s someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an Anti-Socialist someone who understands Marx and Lenin” -Ronald Reagan
Ping to read later.
Bookmarked ... and thanx.
It's a lame argument.
You can tell that he wrote the book in the 1970s when everything was going wrong.
We do win the big things: WWI, WWII, the Cold War.
In between the big things, we don't pay attention, and it looks like losses accumulate, because we don't put effort into things that we think don't concern us or that we have no power over.
It's the same way with electoral politics. If you win a big election, you lose the little ones, because that's how people express their discontent. But it would be wrong to say that that meant you'd lose the next big one.
Seriously, to say that all the things that happen to the country are bad and that there must be a conspiracy involved is stupid.
But given the return to 70s conditions -- inflation, gas shortages, bankruptcies and repossessions -- we'll see a lot more conspiracy thinking in the days to come, rather than less.
What about Groucho’s?
Or that we had something to do with selecting McCain as our nominee?
ping.
Or that we had something to do with selecting McCain as our nominee?
So what did happen? What is really going on with Clinton and Obama? And how did McCain get the nomination? Are the vote totals outright lies? How many people know about this gigantic conspiracy? And how do they keep it secret from the rest of us? Or is the tinfoil interacting oddly with your brain?
It's a lame argument.
You can tell that he wrote the book in the 1970s when everything was going wrong.
We do win the big things: WWI, WWII, the Cold War.
In between the big things, we don't pay attention, and it looks like losses accumulate, because we don't put effort into things that we think don't concern us or that we have no power over.
It's the same way with electoral politics. If you win a big election, you lose the little ones, because that's how people express their discontent. But it would be wrong to say that that meant you'd lose the next big one.
Seriously, to say that all the things that happen to the country are bad and that there must be a conspiracy involved is stupid.
But if we've gone back to 1970s conditions -- inflation, gas shortages, bankruptcies and repossessions -- we'll see a lot more conspiracy thinking in the days to come, rather than less.
Well if FDR said it then who can deny? The conspiracy folks love conspiracies because it explains everything and nothing.
Murray Rothbard had excellent article at mises.org, “The Conspiracy Theory of History Revisited”. Short and to the point.
Or that we had something to do with selecting McCain as our nominee?
Sorry about my double post. It's true that most people don't have much power. The people who run for office are already a small, selected group. And the money primary precedes any actual elections.
But we do have to take into account that it's a very big country. Some people don't know anyone who voted for Bush. You may not know many people who voted for McCain, but they're out there, and there are apparently a lot of them. There are also a lot of people who have views that you and I would think crazy, but they're around and they vote.
Hillary and Obama doesn't matter as much as people think. It's a struggle over power and patronage more than anything else. But the character of who we elect definitely does have an effect.
Large concentrations of power do matter, but the economic realities are as important. There are some things that activists of one sort or another want to do that won't get done, because it would complicate things and make trouble economically. It's more how investors and corporations react to changes in the market that determines things, not the will of a few conspirators.
Gary Allen thought that the country wasn't doing what he wanted because the Rockefellers and their friends were sitting around a table deciding everything. I don't think so.
All I have right now is opinion.
Obama showed up on the DNC stage in 2004 talkin' like a patriot. Close your eyes and you're listening to a pro Constitutional speech.
Where'd HE come from?
I think he was hand picked by the x42's as a sure loser, guaranteeing the bwitch's endorsement. Now, the game is afoot and it is coming back around to bite the democrat/socialist electorate in the @$$.
McCain was selected by the crossover votes of all those open primaries and caucuses.
McCain is the one that 'they' really wanted in the first place.
To my eyes and sensabilities, it's all a show.
I’d say you have 20/20 vision.
"Large concentrations of power do matter, but the economic realities are as important. There are some things that activists of one sort or another want to do that won't get done, because it would complicate things and make trouble economically. It's more how investors and corporations react to changes in the market that determines things, not the will of a few conspirators."
But you follow that with a criticism of Gary Allen, who tried to point out that very fact ..
"Gary Allen thought that the country wasn't doing what he wanted because the Rockefellers and their friends were sitting around a table deciding everything. I don't think so."
Every politician is wealthy and getting wealthier, and they 'legislate' for their own good, rather than 'the people'.
Sounds elitist to me ... and part of that strata that we the people can't be part of.
As I see it...
1% of the population pays 40% of taxes, 5% pays 60%, 10% pays 70%......
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/22652.html
IMHO...the 1% basically choose who the presidential candidates will be...the 5% get to control/access to the senate, the 10 percenters get control and access to the House.
The American people sold their government to a few wealthy..
Warren Buffet himself comes right out saying tax me!!
Until 90% of the population is paying 90% of the taxes...we’ll be “confounded” by the whole mirrors and circus act every 4 years....
A few points:
1) Every time someone is convicted of “conspiracy”, a frequently applied charge, it indicates that yes, they did conspire, but more importantly, they did it poorly and were caught.
2) When people become rich and powerful, all it indicates is that they know how to become and remain rich and powerful. It doesn’t mean they are good at *anything* else, and often, they aren’t. Including conspiracy.
3) When someone who is rich and powerful conspires, it usually has to do with them wanting to become rich and powerful. That is, they are too dumb to realize that they already have what they are conspiring to get.
N.B.: this works both ways. Conspiracy theorists postulate that once the conspiracy overthrows the United States, it will put all the Microsoft Certified Engineers to work digging ditches. This is because the United States has a critical shortage of ditches, I guess, or an overabundance of MSCEs who need to do *something* useful with their lives.
4) Socialists want only two things. The first is for everybody to live like herd animals, because they think this is a better way to live than not living like herd animals.
The second thing is for somehow, through repetition, to do the same thing so many times, that they eventually get a different result. Like jumping off a cliff and *not* hitting the ground. Socialists have no pattern recognition.
This is why socialists invariably want the herd to jump off the cliff *yet again*, and will argue endlessly that jumping off the cliff is the *only* thing to do. They will even argue that other herds that jumped off of cliffs are doing fine, even as they lay, broken and bleeding at the bottom of their own cliff for all to see.
Our cliff will be different, they insist. However, you’ll note that they want everybody else to jump off the cliff first, just to be on the safe side. That is, the rear of the herd.
5) I suspect that long ago, there was a great and powerful conspiracy that spent years accumulating wealth and power. It did so because it knew that in the year 2000, the great and mysterious “Thingy” would happen. Well, they got their wealth and power, but the “Thingy” didn’t happen.
“Uh, so what do we do now?”, most of the conspirators asked themselves. “No idea”, replied the Great Poobah, leader of the conspiracy. “What do you want to do?”, he asked.
“I donno”, they replied. “Just hang out, I guess”, they said with a shrug. “Okay, I move we adjourn the meeting. Be sure to validate your parking before you go.”
In those famous words by a cyborg ..
"Ahw be back"
I don’t know, I’m as anti-McCain as anyone, but there’s no conspiracy there. Lots of liberal independents and boneheaded Republicans voted for him for some reason, but I don’t think there’s a “they” there. Same with Obama - I think he’s a Marxist, but again I think he’s doing well because he’s talented and likeable as long as you don’t scratch the surface.
???
1) People like Gary Allen tend to forget that a lot of people in the country don't agree with his views. It's not just that big money or some conspiracy doesn't want to let him have his way, it's that on some things he's in the minority. It's true that some people are trying to push for changes that the rest of us don't want, but it's too easy to cry "conspiracy!" every time one doesn't get one's own way.
2) Governments aren't going to do things to shake up the markets. It's not so much that the Rockefellers or some other bunch of wirepullers tell the government what to do. It's that nobody wants to upset the apple cart, and some of the things that Gary and the Birchers want and expect would very much confuse or enrage the financial markets.
Take somebody who says: "All we have to do to make things right is to get back to how things were in 1910 or 1850 or 1780." It sounds simple to them, but I don't think they understand how hard it is to undo what's been done. And even if one could, there's no guarantee that things would really get better.
Where Allen's most wrong, I think is in the idea that Western bankers or governments could bring a Lenin or a Hitler or a Mao to power. Governments and bankers do make decisions about how to deal with foreign revolutionaries and dictators, but there's a whole crazy world outside of Washington and New York and London and Paris.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.