Exh GS wip
Criticism of George Soros is definitely warranted, even from a left wing POV.
George Soros is an oligarch and we must fight against and abolish his oligarchy
Soros is not a communist. If he were? The riots/marches for example wouldn't have a strong lib (including rad lib) lean.
https://twitter.com/kazweida/status/1306330224070553601
Also the 'To criticize George Soros is anti-semetic' smear hardly makes sense. This smear would make sense if the snarls were not too being stated by people who are pro-zionist or heck, jewish in nature. (Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro come to mind).
But what is the reason that they are circling the wagons for a wall street scumbag at best like Soros who has also done a lot of damage to left wing causes at worst?
The conservative misfits and fringe right does have an obsession with George Soros, scapegoating him for EVERYTHING. When people like the conservative misfits and fringe right are fanatically focused on demonizing extremely rich Jewish business people and only extremely rich Jewish business people (i.e George Soros, the Rothschilds etc) there’s obviously something very much suspect happening
However, the notion that Soros is secretly a Communist is also stupid, particularly when we consider that Soros used his fortune to pour millions upon millions of dollars into anti Communist opposition movements in his home country of Hungary along with Czechoslovakia and Poland, playing a key role in the overthrow of the socialist bloc in Eastern Europe.
His open society foundation has also been doling money to the Hong Kong protests in more recent times too. Soros has been a Cold War-rior and a staunch believer in capitalism his entire life while also funding cultural liberal/lib and Radical Progressive causes.
If we look at the feelings of true socialist people / organisations in Eastern Europe (i.e Magyar Munkaspart, Gennady Zhughanov etc) they are all wary of George Soros. And for good reason.
*I once asked an alt-righter what he believed would happen if all Jewish people made aliyah to Israel. Would Western nations suddenly be better off? He said in his (ignorant) opinion yes; and he explained further that in his view if that happened there’d be no usury, porn, prostitution, illegal drugs.
I then told him that in Australia, virtually all of those things are run by (1) multinational financial companies with majority gentile boards, (2) non-Jewish middle eastern /Asian crime gangs, or (3) white Australian motorcycle clubs.
George Soros supports neo-liberal colour revolutions. Because of this alone - leftists and socialists should be critical of his work.
*Why do those anti jewish people like that alt righters constantly forget that A.H was quite successful in pushing the Jews out of Europe? The only European countries who currently have a substantial number of them are the UK and France
I don’t know who can fathom what motivates a person of these ideas that Jews are falsely and wrongly accused of doing. And that was kind of my point. Even if people pretend that Jewish people are really involved in shady activities they are falsely and wrongly accused of, if they weren’t doing those things, someone else would be doing them
Maybe George Soro playing a role in throwing over commie regimes in those regions has some merit to it since many of those governments were corrupt as can be
The Liberal/Lib/Radical progressive and leftist riots and marches in the US (like the BLM ones) along with their politics have barely anything to do with George Soros.
The Liberal/Lib/Radical progressive and leftist riots, marches and politics instead have much deeper roots based in the US's class structure.
Soros is a superstructural agent doing what he is able to do with the money that he has, and sure, that has an impact, but it's not the cause. Liberalism/Lib Radical Progressivism would still be hegemonic without George Soros and his ilk . Ya its doesnt seem logical really to criticize George Soros as an individual as that role would be filled with someone else fulfilling it if Soros didn't
George Soros is the de facto owner of the Dems and is likely their biggest individual donor when we factor in all of the 501(c)3s of the Open Society foundations.
In short, they have knowledge of which side their shoes are tied at when it comes to sustaining power over the workers.
There is a point to what that this twitter tweet is claiming. Its a large reason why Soros is uniquely criticized as the core of all things evil despite him being more or less similar to any billionaire philanthropist liberal/lib and doing stuff that any of them would and actually do for better or worse.
There can totally be an antisemitic angle to how a few of them on the utter conservative right approach him clearly. Liberals/Libs, Radical progressives, and some Leftists choose to use his Jewishness to protect him though which is comical in its own right . Though rightoids also hate Bill Gates too
There is rightoid insanity that delves in antisemetism when they go after George Soros which fits with their entire rightoid panic about a 'Jewish conspiracy', involving a 'liberal/lib elite' of billionaires like George Soros.
Liberals /Libs and Radical Progressives are bipedal **** who will use whatever they can as to pick up power and when a specific method outlives it's political economy, they'll toss it and deny ever having co-opted such a thing
Defend George Soros? They've been using that to defend bankers.
Because to Liberals/Libs and Radical progressives, criticism of Wall Street is bigoted hate speech that they silence
The chud obsession with George Soros is so cringe, he’s not even among the top 100 worst billionaires in my book
I think more than some right wing attacks on Soros actually do cross into anti-Semitism territory. Not that attacks on him are so per say, simply often so.
And nope, George Soros isn't a communist but I don't believe he's truly bad for left wing causes, as much as I can see he puts him money in races that are at times pretty good.
As for why liberals/libs and radical progressives reach for 'anti-semitism' as opposed to something more substantive?
Same reason they reached for 'homophobia.' in the Morse scandal
It's only the convenient weapon they know. Within the kind of 'cultured' milieus these claims are oftentimes unimpeachable and already the worst thing a person can be. So it's type of a simply method to just instantly win the argument along with the people they really care about.
From the what I have observed, the anti-semitism defense is valid since the right wing doesn’t simply quit at George Soros or widen their grievances to include ultra-wealthy gentiles as equally culpable.
They truly do believe the Jewish people as whole in the U.S. pull puppet strings behind a certain so to speak. To the point where how they talk of George Soros you could control + f his name and swap it with “lizard people.”
Though the Right wing hates Bill Gates a heck of a lot more than they hate Soros.
Ol' Newt Gingrich attempted to bring this up and was just shut down on Fox News. See here
Yet yet is it a bit unsettling about someone like George Soros spending billions of dollars exerting his will on western democracies?
He has spent billions of dollars of his fortune towards his political agenda, not even doing humanitarian work and obtained his money doing messed up shit during WWII. Seems like several reasons for this he's akin to a cartoon supervillian. But maybe some of his bad pr may have arrived from suspicious sources.
George Soros is sort of a boogeyman to Conservatives and rightists, but he does use a lot of dark money to fund Liberal/lib and radical progressive (and to a much lesser extent leftist) causes (google "George Soros","dark money" so that leaves him open to abuse
George Soros-Backed Dark Money Group Poured Millions Into Election Reform, Dem-Linked Groups, Filings Show see here
George Soros spent $40M getting lefty district attorneys, officials elected all over the country (see here)
Perhaps for his support of progressive prosecutors who have radically altered how the US legal system treats perpetrators? /s
True speak: with all of the conspiracies George Soros is the center of and the truth that he finances so much partisan politics in the US and others, I'm surprised he hasn't been ... gotten more blowback and heat. His son is actually worse. What the entity is who is the driving force behind all of this stuff, I’m sure it emanates from the depths of bad karma/hell etc
I’m so tired of this George Soros dude playing out his neo lliberal/ finance woke capitalist wet dream in all of the US major cities. He’s unelected and he should not be able to have THIS amount of influence.
This is George's most base return on capital since he bought the White House in 2020
Once upon a time, Soros spent money to get state officials into office but the return on capital was rubbish then he realized who had the most power after a governor (maybe more) and he then started financing DA’s that used to not even campaign. He’s a snake.
Some fairly moderate Democrats say that the Soros approved kind of politicians like the DAs he funded are what tcaused them to "walk away." from the Democrats. These George Soros backed DA's policies have a "real-world" impact on crime. Like, how can you run a small business when the government no longer pursues criminals for theft?
Conservatives purged Neocons from the Republican party when the figures like the Koch Bros and Haliburton were getting too much dominance in determining policies. Time for 'the liberal/libs/radical progressives and their leftist allies' to step up and take out the lame-os who are simps for these shadowy foreign financiers.
Wait till we see what open society donates to teacher's unions, professors groups, university and college donations, and of course student unions.
Who’s engaged in more controversial impactful political work in the US political scene, George Soros or al-Zawahiri?
What GHW Bush said to Michael Dukakis about how going soft on crime is a no no if someone you love is effected by it would good for law and order non liberals/non libs/non radical progressives to say to George Soros
Imagine that the guy financing, mini tyrants and villainess radical progressive and left authoritarians, looks nearly exactly the way one would forsee a villainess tyrannical person to appear like. Like a sadder and more pathetic version of Emperor Palpatine.
The full cost of 2022 state and federal midterm elections is projected to exceed $16.7 billion, according to a recent new analysis by the Washington, D.C. non-profit OpenSecrets.
The analysis found Republicans have outspent Democrats when it comes to federal candidates and political committees this midterm election cycle. Republican spending amounted to $4.6 billion, compared to Democrats’ $3.9 billion.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-outspending-democrats-record-2022-midterms-price-tag-shows
https://twitter.com/upholdreality/status/1529517994472267776?t=rfy9V7OUScWUUg041TCFKQ&s=19
Here in the link above is George Soros in 1995 gloating about how he assisted Ukraine in being under IMF austerity "If this isn't meddling in the affairs of a foreign nation, I don't know what is!" "I look at Ukraine with the same frame of mind as I look at real estate investment trusts."
Republicans really hate this guy, but not for any of the good reasons, sorta funny
Most every republican I know hates George for being in their view "the shadowy puppet master behind their most hated news networks."
Eh it depends where you get your info from. Most republicans hate Soros for his interventions in government policy and the more libertarian type of folks only say he's a symptom of rampant ability for the state to intervene in the day to day lives of its citizens. Heck, even the retarded Stefan Molymeme said he has nothing against George Soros, but that states are too mighty and easily swayed.
Don't make the error of the media's spectacle of ogling impoverished citizen's dum dumery for some kind of representation of popular opinion.
As long as he keeps signing my antifa paychecks George is alright! /s
'George Soros is a Communist' says some rightoids. That's more because of politically illiterate people getting their worldview from social media and the news. Anything globalist or left leaning = communist, anything nationalist or right leaning = fascist.
Soros is a globalist, so in certain minds that makes him a communist, even though with whichever close inspection he is such a liberal capitalist.
Neo-cons have no essential understanding of communism. in the neocon guidebook, communist is synonymous with exceedingly bad. they cannot tell you why a communist is bad, merely that someone is a communist, even as it turns they obviously aren’t.
To them its a virtual slave system where there is rampant corruption and only a few percent of people control all the wealth and power - you know, kinda like what we have now...(Capitalism for the elites and Communism for the rest of us With that layer of politicians, judiciary and law enforcement in between /s ) . The ironic thing is Antonio Gramsci said something similar ,see here. I say this as someone who supports certain aspects of Communism ('i support commie slavery' /s)
Around most American conservatives overall consider neolibs to be communists since they're morons that only care about culture war bullshit.
All things are ‘communism’ to rightoid chuds, except for fascism in which they’re the rulers, and then it’s either "western democracy" or "constitutional republicanism" at which point only 0.5% of the population has any actual power.
Is it any wonder they think that Russian Tsarism is a better political system than the Bolshevism system that replaced it. Think back to 2009, Barack Obama, Joseph Stalin, Mao and A.H Facebook meme that these dudes would send within their circles
Or that he has some ultimate plan in the works. One of the dumbest mistakes when it comes to people self-awareness of how the elites are screwing them over is assuming there's more to it, a sort of pact with the devil, a master plan to be implemented
The reality is, most rich people are happy enough to be rich and eager to be even more rich in the future, and that's the end of it. Some of them also visit Epstein's Island, but the large majority are as shortsighted and dull as they look.
They only subject they care is about making the most money currently, someone else would pay later if things go south. That's the reason that nobody is doing things about climate change. It's about the cash of today, the future be danmed if you're not still going to be there to see it.
I keep having to tell myself that the only thing that separates the filthy rich/affluent and the working class/poverty class is how much money they are in possession of. There not they're for the reason of them being necessarily smarter, or more adept, or any such thing; they just have access to more money.
Or that George Soros to rightoids has some ultimate plan going on. One of the dumbest mistakes when it comes to people having self-awareness of the ways that the elites are screwing them over is assuming there's more to that, some pact with the devil, some master plan to be unfolded.
The reality is, most rich people are jolly enough to be rich and interested enough to be even more rich in the future, and that's the bottom line Some of them also visit Jeff Epstein's Island, but the vast majority are as shortsighted and dull as they appear.
We can give thanks to decades of anti-communist programming for our society's reaction to Communism as seen above
So Ukraine is controlled by a Hungarian, pathetic. Liberal/Lib Ukraine is a shadow of its Soviet self
That wasn't very Juche of them. Hmmmm- https://www.georgesoros.com/2015/03/30/last-chance-for-ukraine-and-europe/
https://archive.ph/Br3sE (Angry Billionaire Noises /s)
George Soros owes me money for when I signed up for the ANTIFA super solider program /s
George Soros, in particular, does donate lots of moneys to Liberal/Lib and a few leftist causes and also quite openly. But that is a pretty large stretch to go from there to the claim that Soros, individually, "manipulate[s] the Global Order". George Soros has outsized influence, clearly, but he has not succeeded in upsurping nation states and the economic systems of global capitalism as a main driver of international politics. And it comes off as deluded and fantastical to suggest that he has.
Soros criticizing Xi Jinping by sympathizing with Alibaba and Didi, sure that'll win make George Soros appeal to the people /s
George Soros takes credit for the Tiananmen Square uprisings in 1989. Seriously. He talked openly of this in his anti-China speech at Davos, Switzerland in 2018. Soros actually is a megalomaniac.
"At the heart of this conflict is the reality that the two nations represent systems of governance that are diametrically opposed. The U.S. stands for a democratic, open society in which the role of the government is to protect the freedom of the individual. Mr. Xi believes Mao Zedong invented a superior form of organization, which he is carrying on: a totalitarian closed society in which the individual is subordinated to the one-party state. It is superior, in this view, because it is more disciplined, stronger and therefore bound to prevail in a contest."
Picture being a billionaire with this kind of white and black understanding of reality.
"I have also been actively engaged in China since 1984, when I introduced Communist Party reformers in China to their counterparts in my native Hungary. They learned a lot from each other, and I followed up by setting up foundations in both countries. That was the beginning of my career in what I call political philanthropy. My foundation in China was unique in being granted near-total independence. I closed it in 1989, after I learned it had come under the control of the Chinese government and just before the Tiananmen Square massacre."
Alright, China saw Hungary's example, yet didn't go down the revisionist/capitalist road. And George Soros is upset about it.
"China was accepted as a member of the World Trade Organization in 2001 with the privileges that come with the status of a less-developed country. China embarked on a period of unprecedented growth. It even dealt with the global financial crisis of 2007-08 better than the developed world."
China was FORCED into joining the WTO since at the time China was dominating western economies with it's cheap and effective production. https://www.macrotrends.net/2575/us-dollar-yuan-exchange-rate-historical-chart From 1994 to 2004, the yuan was stable, and then lowered. And at the same time US were butthurt that China was competing unfairly, subsidizing their goods.
"Mr. Xi is engaged in a systematic campaign to remove or neutralize people who have amassed a fortune. His latest victim is Sun Dawu, a billionaire pig farmer. Mr. Sun has been sentenced to 18 years in prison and persuaded to “donate” the bulk of his wealth to charity."
Noooo not my geese with golden eggssss
"China’s largest, highly leveraged real-estate company, Evergrande, has recently run into difficulties servicing its debt. The real-estate market, which has been a driver of the economic recovery, is in disarray. The authorities have always been flexible enough to deal with any crisis, but they are losing their flexibility".
How dare China not rescue failing capitalists? Muh profits are be wrecked!
"In other words, he has turned them into his own yes-men, abolishing the legacy of Deng’s consensual rule".
Yep, Supreme Leader Deng's "consensual rule". Same deal with Nikita Khruschev (and Leon Trotsky, and western lefists and libs) attacked Joseph Stalin with - not sufficient Party democracy! Party democracy, of course, means that capitalist roaders receive free reign to drive the country towards capitalism.
See this in class terms,.What reason is there that capitalist roader Nikita Khruschev would liberalize the economy if there was zero capitalist class to initially? First they create the capitalist class using state capitalism - akin to, so much feudal countries that were in the process of playing catch up to the West - and just then do they liberalize the economy. Joseph Stalin's socialism was strong enough to require 25 years of intentionally sabotaging it from the top to revert back to capitalism.
I think though the Nikita economic liberalization stretch above might be pretty naive on my part yet Stalin appeared from my vantage point to be beloved by his people so what I wrote above about Nikita and economic liberalization cant be fully wrong either.
Still, war communism was needed to have an end. And it did so continuing with the thing at least in DDR were the glory years.
"That was the beginning of my career in what I call political philanthropy"
'Less informed' political junkies and commentators would call it influence peddling .
Jintao Hu and Jingping Xi are the most populist leaders China has had since Zedong Mao. Both of these dudes represented 'conservative' factions of the CPC, conservative like you know they reversed a bunch of Dengist reforms.
The fact that Western billionaires are penning hit pieces on Xi in the WSJ should tell us that he Jinping Xi is NOT a pal of international capital.
If you want to discuss how China is evil State Capitalism and they got too many billionaires, ok, consider the mucky situation that Xi (and Hu) picked up from the market liberal reformers of the late 1980s through early 2000s. It's super challenging and risky to alter things rapidly, but Xi Jinping has been leading China in a admirable direction (from a socialist perspective) than it was going prior to him
This isn't the notion of myself seeing the current Chinese state as an ideal polity; far from that actually. This is just a pragmatic view from me on what sort of reform is currently do able in China given the history of the last 40+ years.
To expect Xi to all of a sudden reverse all of Deng Xiaoping's reforms is as realistic as waiting for Bernie Sanders after he became President immediately implementing Full Communism: There is actually no such thing as a one-man totalitarian dictatorship, in all political systems the interests of all mighty entities has to be taken into account. Even if you can't make the capitalists or others to support you, it is a must to make sure that a critical amount of entities do not go in to open revolt against the political system, leading to civil conflict, which is what would maybe happen if socialist reforms were pursued too fast in a country that now has a large bourgeois class.
This is in fact why Xi Jinping has been organizing, as George Soros states, the party into an assemblage of yes-men/women in fact, he is in the process of removing bourgeois interests - that have entrenched themselves in the state since Xioaping Deng's reforms - from power positions that China could more directly pursue socialist goals without possible internal conflict. If you're a commie you should consider this as a good thing.
And seriously, do you think the billionaire Soros has the ideal interests of workers at heart? Or is it likelier that he uses his wealth and power to further his own class interests?
"much like was done to tibetans" LOL: http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html
"By 1961, Chinese occupation authorities expropriated the landed estates owned by lords and lamas. They distributed many thousands of acres to tenant farmers and landless peasants, reorganizing them into hundreds of communes.. Herds once owned by nobility were turned over to collectives of poor shepherds. Improvements were made in the breeding of livestock, and new varieties of vegetables and new strains of wheat and barley were introduced, along with irrigation improvements, all of which reportedly led to an increase in agrarian production.34
Many peasants remained as religious as ever, giving alms to the clergy. But monks who had been conscripted as children into the religious orders were now free to renounce the monastic life, and thousands did, especially the younger ones. The remaining clergy lived on modest government stipends and extra income earned by officiating at prayer services, weddings, and funerals.35
Both the Dalai Lama and his advisor and youngest brother, Tendzin Choegyal, claimed that “more than 1.2 million Tibetans are dead as a result of the Chinese occupation.”36 The official 1953 census--six years before the Chinese crackdown--recorded the entire population residing in Tibet at 1,274,000.37 Other census counts put the population within Tibet at about two million. If the Chinese killed 1.2 million in the early 1960s then almost all of Tibet, would have been depopulated, transformed into a killing field dotted with death camps and mass graves--of which we have no evidence. The thinly distributed Chinese force in Tibet could not have rounded up, hunted down, and exterminated that many people even if it had spent all its time doing nothing else.
Chinese authorities claim to have put an end to floggings, mutilations, and amputations as a form of criminal punishment. They themselves, however, have been charged with acts of brutality by exile Tibetans. The authorities do admit to “mistakes,” particularly during the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution when the persecution of religious beliefs reached a high tide in both China and Tibet. After the uprising in the late 1950s, thousands of Tibetans were incarcerated. During the Great Leap Forward, forced collectivization and grain farming were imposed on the Tibetan peasantry, sometimes with disastrous effect on production. In the late 1970s, China began relaxing controls “and tried to undo some of the damage wrought during the previous two decades.”38
"military buildup overseas especially"
There is nothing bad with this from the domestic pov of China; a government should at least in theory be able to take action to secure its geopolitical interests and physical security. If someone wants to talk about military buildup overseas, the US has more military bases around the world than any other country by far.
"the buildup of a totalitarian ai enhanced 1984 style surveillance system under the auspices of a social credit scheme"
Wait until the person in his quote learns about the NSA.
"People like xi jinping are worse than people like Biden, simply because Biden is a mere figurehead of a system we need to confront systemically, whereas xi is a strongman, a strongman who's need to remain in power and benefit from it are ultimately much stronger than the us executive branch which remains néolibéral no matter who's in power. Xi has the power to destroy lives, or in the case of the ughyurs people an entire people with only a small cadre of similar minded cronies to tell him y s or no to any sort of extreme action."
Jinping Xi is an elected official, who was voted in by the Central Committee and able to be removed by the Central Committee.
These 'cult of personality' brainworms are precisely what I say when I state "There is really no such thing as a one-man totalitarian dictatorship". Xi is not the damn god-emperor of China, he is a leader of the country with overall support and consent from all political organization layers from the Central Committee to the People's Congress.
And 'has the power to destroy lives'? Have you paid attention to the GWOT for the last two decades, how for the last two decades the POTUS' has been ordering war acts committed without any congressional approval, how much power that was centralized in the executive branch under GWB and Dick Cheney? There are purely millions of dead citizens in the Middle East/North Africa due to he US's actions over the last two decades and you feel a need to say that somehow Jinping Xi is worse than the likes of GWB, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden? How many countries has China invaded or bombed in the last twenty odd years? Zero.
Comments
Post a Comment