Friday, 5 March 2010

Alex Jones - lies about neo-liberalism / Ron Paul

Alex Jones has a major contradiction over his apparent hatred of neo-liberalism. What's the contradiction? His favourite politican, Ron Paul is a neo-liberal and Jones did all he can to try to get Ron Paul elected, even running the RonPaulWar-room website.

Ron Paul has written six books on neo-liberalism, he is closely involved with the following think-tanks and people whom are the leading lights of neo-liberalism: Ludwig Von Mises Institute, Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell, Hayek, Friedman, Mises, etc: the Austrian School (of Economics).

And yet, here's some examples of Alex Jones' websites pretending they are against neo-liberalism:

Prisonplanet writes of the Trilateral Commission that:
Many of its members are also Bilderbergers with the same mutual interests for the development of globalization, the so-called economics of 'neo-liberalism' including wholesale privatization of anything that moves, the new world order and corporate capitalist totalitarianism.
What if that had said "the economics of Ron Paul"?

Here's Prisonplanet suggesting "neo-liberalism" associated with Iceland's recent economic crisis:
Iceland Pushes Back Against Neolib Bankers
And here's Jones' Infowars claiming Ron Paul....errr....I mean neo-liberalism was the cause of Argentina's economic collapse:
Neolib Policies and Argentina’s Economic Collapse

Central to the collapse was the implementation of neo-liberal policies which enabled the swindle of billions of dollars by foreign banks and corporations. Many of Argentina’s assets and resources were shamefully plundered.
One can debate the merits or otherwise of neo-liberalism as an economic doctrine. However, there is simply no debate that Alex Jones is playing both sides of the fence.....condemning neo-liberalism as part of some vast conspiracy responsible for America's economic problems, whilst at the same time claiming neo-liberal Ron Paul is the answer to those same economic problems!

This really doesn't make sense. No surprise, I guess, but......shouldn't Jones somehow be made to face all these contradictions? He never does.

Here's something much better: John Harvey on "A History of neo-Liberalism".

Pt 1/5

Pt 2/5

Pt 3/5

Pt 4/5

Pt 5/5


socrates said...

Nice entry. This is about people who want to have their cake and eat it too. Like Rivero claiming not to be anti-Jew. Then don't publish Curtis Maynard among other examples of Rivero acting like a neonazi.

the_last_name_left said...

Ta ;)

I wish I had the Ron Paul interview in which he said Americans were overpaid. He was going "like woooo - wish I was paid like those Michigan autoworkers! It's crazy!"

Of course, I think he has a point - the end of imperialism would mean a reduction in the wealth of empire. (like Orwell says in an essay I posted earlier.) But Ron Paul never says that. And that's dishonest. Of course, it's hard to get elected if you say that.....and I'm not sure that Ron Paul really wants to end Imperialism. Other imperialisms, no doubt, but American imperialism? Really?

I've made the point elsewhere about Prisonplanet's contradictory stance of anti-neo-liberalism whilst also cravenly supporting the neo-liberal Ron Paul.(Rivero prefers to link to LewRockwell. same thing.) But previously I never saw it running through the readers' comments so much as I did today. I noticed whilst I was looking for the quotes at Prisonplanet about "the evils of neo-liberalism" (which I knew would be there.) The readers' comments are littered with the usual demonisation one expects at Prisonplanet - but it's about neo-liberals.

Doesn't it matter that Ron Paul is "a neo-liberal?

Doesn't that interfere with the demonisation at all?

No. Apparently not. The fact Ron Paul is perfectly reasonably called "a neo-liberal" does not impact upon the demonisation of "neo-liberals" and their "evil" in the least.

This is in the public comments(!) of a website of a personality that is unequivocally supportive of Ron Paul. Give the same crowd a Ron Paul story, and they cheer.

it could be bankers, it could be jews (ooops zionists), it could be globalists, it could be neo-libs, it doesn't matter - Jones' audience only need telling good from bad.

And Jones' audience (all) call "other people" sheep. Yeah, right.......

the_last_name_left said...

I tried putting this point to a blagger..err...blogger whom posts at Rivero's WRH --"disinter". S/he is a paid-up member at WRH - and is also a big-time Ron Paul supporter, and a radical free-marketeering neo-liberal ie into Mises, Rockwell, Ron Paul/Schiff, Hayek, Friedman, etc etc.

"Disinter" asked why s/he should care what Rivero or Alex Jones say......

The answer being because "disinter" is a paid-up member of Rivero's chorus -- and Rivero (like Alex Jones et al) paints neo-liberalism as the doctrine of the NWO.

The contradiction is obvious. Yet disinter's defence is to ask why Rivero is of any interest! lol.


So again - this theme of supposed neo-liberals supporting Rivero and his trashing of neo-liberalism.

Covering all bases, huh?

It's ridiculous - condemning Argentina's collapse as result of NewWorldOrder neo-liberal doctrine whilst also claiming Ron Paul's neo-liberalism is the antidote.

They don't know what on earth they are on about, or they do. I don't know which is worse.....

disinter is heavily into demonising "socialism" - especially socialist healthcare atm. s/he calls it "slavery". Europe is full of healthy slaves, apparently.....whilst america wants to be ill but free. Gee.

There's also the recurring theme of the usual Federal Reserve rubbish.....and "debt dollars".

I asked disinter's blog what exactly these "debt-dollars" are dollars "debt".

No answer.

I don't think anyone has a coherent answer to this question - because the claim is hogwash. It's a claim made by ignorami.

It's kinda funny, how "everyone knows" about the FedReserve and "debt dollars".....yet nobody can give a coherent explanation for what the hell they really mean by such "criticism".

It's all rubbish - empty sloganeering. Sure, it capitalises on lots of ill-will, but it's empty in terms of genuine content. Like as if all these paranoid morons around Rivero and Jones et al understand central banking and how currency issue and state financing works. They clearly don't - yet not only do they pretend they do, they claim to have this special insight and a seemingly obvious solution to all the problems.

And what is a major part of their criticism and solution?

Criticism: The federal reserve is a private, for profit enterprise.

Their solution: nationalise it, and bring it under stricter government control and jurisdiction.

This is from Ron Paul bots!!??


This is from anti-government types, insistent on reducing government intervention and regulation!

They need to answer why the profit motive and private ownership of the Fed have failed so disastrously, as they claim it has, and why they support the same principles for education, healthcare, banking, and everything else.....and why these principles will magically work for healthcare and education when they've failed so badly at banking and finance (things one might expect them to be much better at)

Something odd about all this.