From: Michael Wiik (mwiik@messagenet.com)
Date: Wed Aug 14 2002 - 22:16:05 MDT
lcorbin@tsoft.com wrote:
> Mike, I've read only a little of Gatto's book, but statements such
> as the above are not encouraging.
Don't confuse my quick summary with Gatto's book.
> What sort of model of society
> do you hold when you can claim that "the captains of industry...
> were not going to be suitable for factory work"?
I have no idea what you are talking about. If you can refer to a 'claim' I
made, that would help. If you want to play some sort of cut and paste game
with my post, put quote marks around it, and then state that I claimed this,
I'll need to see if this warrants moderator intervention.
I'll admit that my summary isn't even that satisfying to me. I don't know
the 'why' yet. I don't know who initiated it. I don't know if the numerous
folks Gatto quotes were irrelevant minor functionaries or if they had
real influence. I admit to not much knowledge about exactly when and how
factory-type industry was created in America. I'm hoping to learn more.
> In my model, or
> understanding, those captains of industry, e.g. Vanderbilt, couldn't
> have cared less what the state of the countries children and workers
> was going to be in a few decades in the future. They focused entirely
> on the bottom line---next week's if not today's.
I think you're confused, I was discussing industry not day trading.
> This stinks of conspiracy theory.
What does?
> Conspiracy theorists arrive at
> elaborate and contrived explanations involving hidden cabals and
> purposes so secret that they're never committed to paper.
Whatever floats your boat. I have no idea what you mean or what you are
referring to. If you're making some oblique, hidden reference that there are
purposes so secret that John Gatto hasn't committed them to paper, then I
really have no idea whatsoever. I'm only reading his book.
> You or
> Mr. Gatto will have to provide me a lot of evidence that, for
> a concrete example, the "captains of industry" carefully planned
> the future of the United States.
Or what? In any case I don't see what your sentence above has to do with
anything I said in my summary.
I recently read an old Atlantic Monthly article on the DeBeers diamond mine
people. It suggests that basically (warning: personal summation ahead) DeBeers
snookered the american (and later japanese) people that diamonds were actually
valuable, perhaps even an investment. This went on for decades. Dont have
the link onhand, you can find it in a recent related Slashdot article if no
inclined.
> Can you buttress your position with either facts or explanations?
I don't have a position to buttress. Nonetheless I plan to finish reading
the existing chapters, then reread it while using mindmanager to get a more
graphic view for further chronological plotting, among other purposes.
> Lee Corbin
>
> P.S. I had to give up on Lyndon LaRouche's fantasies more than
> a couple of decades back because of exactly this kind of appealing,
> but ultimately ridiculous, prose.
Appealing but ultimately ridiculous prose. Exactly this kind. Sorry, doesn't
parse for me. Off-topic.
Again, I think you may be confusing my quick summation of several dozen pages
of Gatto's book with the book itself. Regardless, I found your response
thoroughly confusing and off-topic. I get that way myself sometimes so I can't
criticize it that much. But if this is your debating style then I don't plan
on continuing to argue with you, so if you want to think you've 'won', then
feel free.
-Mike
---- This message was posted by Michael Wiik to the Extropians 2002 board on ExI BBS. <http://www.extropy.org/bbs/index.php?board=61;action=display;threadid=52767>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:07 MST