Bilderberg 2012 In Chantilly, Virginia

[Lxxx]

Maybe I'm one of the lizard people, part of the misinformation campaign to discredit the intellectual collossi who have discovered us.

Tit

Just messin' with your head, mate. I'm not really one of the lizard people.

But then again that's what I'd expect you to say if you really were a reptilian....

Or maybe that's a double bluff and I really am one....

 

Err.... That's what I just said brains.

[Lxxx]

Just ignore the closed minded idiots on here, the island seems full if them, they really need to get out more.

 

Keep the updates coming, there's a few on here who are interested.

Just ignore the isolated-fantasist idiots on here, the island seems full of them, they really need to get out more.

 

Keep the updates coming, there's few on here who are interested.

 

You seem like a funny guy, you must be quite popular.

 

Surprisingly, more popular than you are.

 

I'll resist the obvious pun on this one.

[Lxxx]

Do some research. Stop being lazy and dismissive.

 

You insolent shit.

 

Research done long ago. Learnings: lots of high-powered people get together for "off the record" debate. Lots of folk outside debate fearing capitalist / global government consipracy. Group meeting is private and therefore I can't know what they're talking about. Conclusion: On balance I think it's a good thing that people are talking and thinking, and I can understand why the quality of those discussions may be better if they're off the record. End of as far as I'm concerned. I'll leave it as yet another issue for Guardian readers to get aggitated about.

 

Oh dear.

[pongo]

Well that would depend on what sort of conspiracy you subscribe to.

 

I am not interested in a conspiracy based analysis of history. I do not see the economic and legal technocrats as a nefarious conspiracy, but as self believing and misguided. I believe that these sorts of people tend to still be about planned technical solutions - which is an arrogance. They are likely well meaning and serious - but as misguided as the earnest revolutionaries which many of them once were. They remind me of school prefects or the student council.

 

That said - if you want to get something done these are probably the people to lobby.

 

Some of those who research and protest these sorts of gatherings, being opinion makers, will almost certainly one day be on the inside of such meetings, such is the pointless cycle.

[Bobbie Bobster]

Err.... That's what I just said brains.

What?

[stopmakingsense]

More pathetic and insulting nonsense. Muddying legitimate and verifiable questions in with freemasons and aliens. Any questions of power and its workings must automatically mean that the person pondering over it must believe in the craziest and most fantastical idea out there. Power is far more complex than any of that crap can come up with. Whatever you may have read 30 years ago is almost irrelevant to what is known now about the meetings. Meeting summaries have come to light, multiple memoirs, questions have been asked of attendees, tax documents and more. Its existence was still denied in the 1980s. Now it cannot be denied but is instead laughed at or passed off as just a game of golf and a friendly chat. I'm well aware of Chatham House and its rules but at least some of their stuff is made public and is never denied. Many of the people who attend Bilderberg are representatives of hardly the most trustworthy companies and organisations of our day: Shell, Goldman Sachs, Barclays and so many other major banks; the heads of the EU, NATO, IMF, World Bank, WTO mixing with royalty, politicians, military and major media like The Economist, Financial Times, Washington Post etc. These people are just little representatives either, many of them are the heads of these organisations. I want an open society, not one where fraudulent banks and profit driven corporations sneak around meeting in plush 5-star hotels with other individuals from various influential global and national bodies while sat across from major media that tries to deny its existence. When you look into their interlocking directorships as well and not just what they are listed as on the attendees list, it's astonishing. So many connections. It's just fascinating and then men involved with the group over the years have been highly influential in shaping the post-world war two world. This is history, not dreaming up ideas of fat old men sat around a table holding hands trying to communicate with the king of underworld.

[Chinahand]

Stopmakingsense - what Pongo is saying is far closer to the reality than anything you'd find on abovetopsecret.com etc. I'm not accusing you of conspiracy mindrot, there is much to what you've said about open society etc, but in what way do you think Bilderberg and its ilk having an unhealthy influence?

 

Is Denis Healey on the vanguard of global capitalism, or is it communism? He was on Bilderberg's steering committee for 30 years.

 

Bilderberg started off as an Atlanticist organization in the cold war trying to find ways of keeping Europe and the US allies and has mutated in to a global talking shop little different from Davos.

 

Think of it as an education in capitalist group think - I bet they have discussions on CSR nowadays and how to stop a Greek or Spanish banking collapse ending the free market in Europe.

 

You are so concerned you think you need to publicise it on Manx Forums. Me, I'm not surprised the heads of large corporations and national and supra-national organizations meet to discuss and justify their policies and ideas.

[Yibble]

profit driven corporations sneak around meeting in plush 5-star hotels w

 

That's better. At least we now know your true colours.

 

You think pursuit of profit is a bad thing. You don't like business. You're spiteful and envious about people who (presumably) live more affluent lifestyles than you do (though something about your tone does suggest there may be a spoiled little rich kid speaking)

 

Like many on the extreme left, you can't resist speaking to the rest of us in a 'holier than thou' tone. You codescending shit,

 

Capitalism has plenty of faults, but basically it's what makes the world go round. Whereas much of the misery and (premature) death in the last century has been caused by the likes of you and your fellow leftie travellers.

 

The problem with the world is not the organisations you're clearly convinced are secretly plotting, imperfect as they may be, it's the fruit loop ideas perpetrated by those who think a nice bit of command economy (commanded by themselves of course) is the way to go.

 

So, come on then, you're dressing your views up as some sort of crusade for transparency. Let's have a bit of transparency from you: Which of the following statements is closer to your point of view?

 

A) Pursuit of profit is normally a good thing. Socialsim is a bad thing. It doesn't work. Worse still, it's greatest victims are nearly always the weak and the poor. Or,

B) Socialism is all about fair shares and caring for each other. It's just unfortunate the way things tended to work out pretty much everywhere it's been tried.

 

Slightly loaded questions I know (I admit my pro-capitalist bias) and I'm sure you can quibble about them, but it shouldn't be too tough for you to give us an overall steer of where you're coming from. See if you can be honest with yourself as well as with us. Meanwhile I might go off and pen a parody of the answer I think you're going to give us.

[Yibble]

Chinahand. Good post.

 

Much more balanced and less snidey than mine. I'm afraid sanctimonious toss like Stopmaking sense is posting really gets my goat though.

[quilp]

Chinahand. Good post.

 

Much more balanced and less snidey than mine. I'm afraid sanctimonious toss like Stopmaking sense is posting really gets my goat though.

Yes, great post, me ol'China. And SMS's condescending arrogance is breathtaking; making the assumption that he is THE one-eyed man in a kingdom of the blind. Ha!

[Lxxx]

profit driven corporations sneak around meeting in plush 5-star hotels w

 

That's better. At least we now know your true colours.

 

You think pursuit of profit is a bad thing. You don't like business. You're spiteful and envious about people who (presumably) live more affluent lifestyles than you do (though something about your tone does suggest there may be a spoiled little rich kid speaking)

 

Like many on the extreme left, you can't resist speaking to the rest of us in a 'holier than thou' tone. You codescending shit,

 

Capitalism has plenty of faults, but basically it's what makes the world go round. Whereas much of the misery and (premature) death in the last century has been caused by the likes of you and your fellow leftie travellers.

 

The problem with the world is not the organisations you're clearly convinced are secretly plotting, imperfect as they may be, it's the fruit loop ideas perpetrated by those who think a nice bit of command economy (commanded by themselves of course) is the way to go.

 

So, come on then, you're dressing your views up as some sort of crusade for transparency. Let's have a bit of transparency from you: Which of the following statements is closer to your point of view?

 

A) Pursuit of profit is normally a good thing. Socialsim is a bad thing. It doesn't work. Worse still, it's greatest victims are nearly always the weak and the poor. Or,

B) Socialism is all about fair shares and caring for each other. It's just unfortunate the way things tended to work out pretty much everywhere it's been tried.

 

Slightly loaded questions I know (I admit my pro-capitalist bias) and I'm sure you can quibble about them, but it shouldn't be too tough for you to give us an overall steer of where you're coming from. See if you can be honest with yourself as well as with us. Meanwhile I might go off and pen a parody of the answer I think you're going to give us.

 

Capitalism is probably the best system that we have to choose from at the moment (if we had to choose one), however we've never had true capitalism. We're much nearer a merger of state and corporate interests, otherwise known as fascism, than we are to true capitalism. We've seen corporate greed usurp free market economics. We've seen businesses that should have gone to the wall under a true capitalist society bailed out by the state, and continue to do so. We've seen the finance sector become such a pivotal player that whilst they contribute very little they continue to hold the world to ransom to this day.

Corporations now lead the world and not nations, and as such have very little checks and balances on their activity. That's what needs addressing.

[pongo]

@Yibble - I tend to view Bilderberg and their ilk as essentially leftist. Certainly they seem to be very much about the idea of planned economy and of knowing what is best for people. And, as is the general drift both in Europe and the US, they seem to be very much about corporatism ... which to my view exists in opposition to the free market and freedom in general since it is essentially about a planned economy and enforcing control.

 

I don't hate this sort of thing. I just disagree with it. Mr Healey, founding member, was, of course, a Communist before he converted to monetarism. I think he was a good and serious man ... but I also think he came from the sort of thinking which was very much about knowing what was best for people.

 

ETA: Lxxx has said something similar in a different way whilst I was writing that.

[Yibble]

Pongo. I think you and I are probably quite closely aligned here, except that I'm not so sure there's a 'plan / contol' agenda. Those involved are undoubtedly in powerful positions, where it makes good sense to think about what's coming over the horizon. That doesn't amount to colusion in moving towards a 'planned economy and enforcing control' though, and I suspect the very idea would be an anathema to most of the participants.

 

Oh, and I agree with your analysis of Denis (Lord) Healey.

 

Lxxx. I'm not arguing against 'checks and balances' (though have you any idea of the cost of the compliance burden to large businesses?). I also share your distaste for the taxpayer picking up the bill for failed private enterprises. However I think your argument that companies and states are uniting to bring about fascism is complete tosh. In fact I'd actually argue that it's the ongoing advance of capitalism that is leading many countries out of tyranny. Much of Africa, and even China are now doing much better now that SMS's 'profit driven corporations' increasingly act as a counterbalance to state control.

[pongo]

But Yibble - technocratic policy, often also run to the advantage of basically monopolist corporations does actually have a lot in common with what fascism really was about. Fascism and corporatism really do have a shared history. Fascists were all about putting "experts" in charge. So Lxxx is making a good point.

 

I am not saying that they are fascists - but I think you need to be very cautious of technocrats in govt. It was the Bildermeisters, by all accounts, who gave us the EU. Well that seemed like a good idea technically.

 

Replacing the state with corporations, or running policy to the advantage of private enterprise does not necessarily imply a free market. A free market and a free economy is about much more than just turning everything over to private enterprise. Look at Russia for example.

[Yibble]

I mainly agree Pongo, and I'm not advocating that government and business should merge (heaven forbid) or that governments should be primarily technocratic. Government should (as Lxxx cautions) act as 'check and balance' on private enterprise, whilst fostering conditions in which private enterprise will thrive.

 

I don't get the sense that's what SMS is advocating though. I smell an anti-capitalist / socialist who is masking his dubious opinions with a (pompous and arrogant) veil of transparency*.

 

* can veils be pompous and arrogant? I doubt it. Time for the pub.