View Story | 15 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
like any group where elites from the political and business world come together to discuss policy. It's just that, discussing policy, not a conspiracy. Attendance at a Bilderberg meeting doesn't prove much of anything, least not that a person is an agent of the alleged conspiracy. Like other such groups Bilderberg needs closely watched but there is a lot of conspiracy theorist bilge floating around about that group that makes little sense. The conspiracy mindset can just as easily serve progressive or conservative interests depending on who is in power, it's mostly a matter of their always being opposed to whatever party has the reins of government because they are all part of the "conspiracy". With Bush in power it sounds progressive to chase conspiracies but when Dems are in power these same conspiracy theories work against us and serve the right. During the 1990s the conspiracy theorists were using Clinton's attendance at Bilderberg to attack him. They'll do the same with Edwards having attended.
by canyonrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 03:55:30 AM PDT
except that it is behind closed doors and does seems to be setting policy against the will of a lot of "we, the people." Even the Board of Trustees of our town's little tiny library here legally must keep their meetings open to the public, according to the laws of the state. They aren't even supposed to discuss business at all outside of their approved forum. NOT even e-mail chat outside of the official e-mail list. Seems to me it was bad enough for people in the whitehouse to be using the RNC e-mail, nevermind having a bunch of "interested" but unelected strangers talking about our future in an organized, secret forum. What right do these people have to make "choices" that they have the power to carry forward? We the people are the 'stockholders' here, right?
I like to play monopoly with kids for a while, and then start asking them questions about hegemony and how it would work at the gameboard... Next, The Grand Chessboard. ps: thanks Bobschacht. This is important, and hard to get out there to the 'reasonable' public.
Let Sibel Speak
by peaceloveandkucinich on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 04:24:27 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
that these groups including Bilderberg should not be meeting and discussing and setting policy behind closed doors, without public oversight. But they aren't a "conspiracy". Thinking of world events in terms of a global conspiracy has been problematic for progressive Democrats in the past. I personally saw how this worked in the 1992 elections and got caught up in that thinking myself, back when Bush 41 was the target, only to see the same conspiracy theories turned against Democrats as soon as Clinton got into office.
by canyonrat on Mon Mar 26, 2007 at 03:19:06 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 15 comments