Re: <nettime> morlock elloi

[lizvlx <liz@ubermorgen.com>]

Your talking about Soros is quite antisemitic.
(And your whole theory therefore false and unfounded)
I am not gonna cite the infected paragraphs here.
They are quite easy to spot.

Ok…one..

“Money dealing capitalist"
> He is a money dealing capitalist, ...
> investor clients with closer ties to the industry, putting his money
> both in giant industrial investments etc. …. contact
> with the OBOR and Industrial Internet consortium, Cisco and IBM, Intel
> etc. vs. Googles, Facebooks, and others. Yet he still has the ability
> to play like the letter fraction, which is the owners of Wall Street
> giants like Morgan, Sachs, part of Rockefeller and Rothschild etc. So,
> I bet if one go through Soros’ largest investors, one would find those
> corporations that have closer ties to the industry, while their money
> is also invested whatever brings more and easier money including wars
> and military industrial complex, or Google.

Bye/lizvlx

> On 9. Apr 2018, at 23:56, Örsan Şenalp <orsan1234@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Jaromil, Soros is in us, he is everywhere don't you see that :)
> 
> Suicide bunny..  funny.. though I don't really get in what sense what
> I do here would bring my end himm may be you're right..
> 
> I wish, instead, you would think of me being spastic or autistic, or
> too naive in insisting on authenticity of radical politics. Then I
> wouldn’t mind.
> 
> Well.. even in case of extremely well planned and organized
> revolutionary counter-conspiracy, which I don't think neither possible
> or desirable, it would be almost impossible to be so close to Soros as
> Evgeny is, (which he is not hiding) and be able to seriously pursue
> any radical politics. Which is claimed or attributed to him here, and
> other places, mainly mainstream and liberal media.
> 
> The booklet you refer, I shared on the other thread, by Evgeny and
> Bria shows that Evgeny and Bria are collaborating, in and on
> Barcelona, and other cities. where there are lots of stuff happening
> about cities (movements), digit rights (movements), independence
> movements etc. So it should not come as a surprise that Soros pops up
> from somewhere.
> 
> This is what Evgeny says in his wiki-page: he is involved in Online
> Transitions (of Eastern Europe and beyond), he is a fellow at the New
> America Foundation (chaired by Eric Schmidt and Ann Marry Slaughter),
> he sits in a OSF fellowship chair, he is blogging for the 'Foreign
> Policy', he is a Yahoo fellow at 'Walsh School of Foreign Service'..
> you name it.
> 
> Moreover Morozov's role in all these places, as in Barcelona, and in
> broader Europe makes him one of the most influential persons of 2018
> right, according to some Italian magazine (bet it is not an ordinary
> one)? Do you really think he is such influential? Does anyone else?
> Anyone without Soros funding-income relation ties him to do so? Can
> you see or feel such influence when he is around you? in his link to
> Francesca for instance, or may be Ada Colau or in Catalan Movement of
> independence? or the rising cities movement?
> 
> If one would say Morozov’s is a genuinely radical internet critic, and
> he has an amazingly bright brain and the creativity in his critics is
> like Picasso painting.. and that is what brought him to where he is
> now, others would probably lough at it and claim the opposite. One can
> easily claim that those who are crediting him are doing that because
> they have feel obliged, by consent and for self-interest, to be able
> to get access to the next round of funding etc. And they can only be
> radical as a liberal can, not further than that. A person from outside
> would either see Morozov as part of Soros' inner circle, or would
> think that Soros is really a radical-critical even a leftist one. Or
> if Evgeny is a really radical left critic, then Soros is a suicide
> bunny J
> 
> Seriously, I do think that these guys are playing a suicidal game, but
> I don’t think in bunny's  way.
> 
> There is a clear connection, a good hacker cannot miss here.
> 
> Probably an individual, and his individual political vision could be
> able to keep sort of autonomy or independence while working in Soros
> circle. Yet it can only be a modest one, a liberal kind. What we read
> from Calin Dan's 97 email to net-time list, even that was quite not
> possible. Morally, in my opinion it is not even an issue, being part
> of conspiracies of Soros (not the Soros conspiracy) is not a simple
> thing, or joke.
> 
> He does not rely only on soft-velvet glows to fist countries down; or
> only deploys tech tools for online transitions. The guy has involved
> and does involve in dirty stuff too; in his tool kit there are
> assassinations, spying, military coups, civil wars, or financing
> armament and war parties, you name it.
> 
> Worse of all about not having a proper theory of class fractions and
> Soros place in fractured class struggle is deadly. Soros’ operations,
> as a class actor, have contributed massively in regenerating fascism
> in Hungary, Russia, Turkey, Egypt.. and Trump too is partly of his
> creation -and partly of the other fractions of finance capital against
> which he might be struggling or resisting, but they have built a
> transnational ‘deep state’ during the 80s and 90s. Of course fascists
> own creativity and the despair of the masses too are part of the
> story. Still one can make a sad collection of standardized Alex Jones
> stories, in every language now; Jones became millionaire but almost in
> each country where Soros operated there emerged many Joneses, Soros’
> class operations fed conspiracy theories, and in return they enriched
> the right wing bases. When seeing the involvement of liberal / radical
> left-civil society coalitions with Soros’ operations masses bought
> conspiracy theories and Ergodan, Orban, Putin, gained and consolidated
> their power. They are growing on the fear of external threat and they
> too create their own conspiracies; then national leftists and
> ultra-right merges at the bottom again against the Soros led (plus NWO
> conspiracy as a bonus)... This shit almost everywhere. And liberal and
> libertarian nativity, liberal-left alliances against secular state
> classes (sometimes formed with anti-secular forces like Muslim
> Brothers, or Gulen in Turkey, of salafi or wahabi sort and others
> leaves us what we look at as world now..
> 
> ... now should we close our hacker eyes and not to see the burning
> implications such relationships would have in terms of politics
> -forget about the radical one; just plain politics.
> 
> And not develop any analysis of Soros, and his politics, to link all
> these things being discussed on the list and he is linked to; because
> fascists and neo-Nazis are targeting him..
> 
> At least Geert has been asking the right questions and calling for a
> reasonable theory. Shouldn’t have he, and others ask those questions,
> or did you, we found an answer?
> 
> Well to me, what underlies this Soros phenomenon is not the evil, or
> not a Popperrian fallacy in ‘open society’ vision, or any conspiracy
> of an esoteric kind. But it is purely and neatly about classes and
> class struggle. It is systemic, about class act, and real
> 'conspiring'. Soros is related to a crack that emerged, back in time,
> the Month Pelerin Society period. Between the good governance guys so
> so-called neo-institutionalist on the one hand; and monetarist
> neoliberals on the other. Actually the division goes further back to a
> century ago. Roland Coase and his fellows are the successors of Dewey,
> Veblen, Ford so on names of the progressive/efficiency era (at the end
> 19cc) representing 'the Industrialist' . Hayek, Friedman and their
> fellows are then the successors of Carl Menger and Bhöm Bawerk, the
> marginalist revolutionaries of 'the rentier' or 'the leisure classes'.
> 
> Modern time successors of these two camps have clashed in Chile, in
> Turkey, and other military coups and in civil wars as in Vietnam and
> Korea, till the end of 70s. At the time Reagan and Thatcher came to
> power, and Paul Volcker put in charge as head of FED, at first a
> neoliberalism-neo-institutionalism synthesis got formed. This was a
> sort of systemic neo-liberalism what they started to build, something
> akin to ‘ultra-imperialism’  theory of Kautsky. This one of the
> reasons why liberal-left is this much in favour of Soros, since he was
> playing a key role in the marriage of intellectuals and class agency
> of two main finance capital fractions.
> 
> With the collapse of USSR and the NIEO bloc at the end of 80s and with
> the shift of China to State capitalism, industrialist wing of the
> finance capital became dependant more and more on the finance for new
> investments, capturing privatisations in Eastern Europe, Africa, Asia
> massive space opened up, freed from communists and alike. When the
> Industrialist class fraction, represented by neo-institutionalists
> lost their influence Volcker lost his position to Greenspan. Thus
> Hayekian vision (exactly as it happened at the end of 1880s with the
> Marginalist revolution) came to the fore and captured the commanding
> heights. The replacement of neo-neo synthesis called Washington
> Consensus. What was happening both in 1880s and 1980s were almost
> identical. The loss of systemic grasp of the industrialist wing of
> finance capital and capture of the commanding heights by money dealing
> and interest bearing capital fractions.
> 
> As his patron Popper, Soros too had been playing a middle man role,
> bridging between these two clicks -for the sake of the system. Here
> comes in his 'reflexivity theory' in, which Soros claims to apply to
> financial markets in explaining how he wins. Yet where he also applies
> his theory is trasformismo: co-opting left critical reflections, for
> systemic survival purposes.
> 
> The above gives a brief synthesis of Gerard Dumenil & Dominique Levi’s
> and Kees Van der Pijl’s analyses (which I referred in earlier email).
> To my knowledge, and in my opinion, these present best available
> fractional analysis of intra-class struggle that has been shaping the
> global-transnational capitalisms and its crisis since 20st cc. In
> class and fraction terms, totality of the mentioned above represents
> the transnational monopoly/finance capital; which is divided into two
> fractions. Those tied to giant industrial businesses and investments
> on the one hand, and those others who are more, if not totally,
> independent from industry -thus dominating it.
> 
> The workers and managerial classes needs to be added into broader
> picture and then you have national capitalists resisting to these
> globalists at their back yards, if they can by playing to the hand of
> one or other side, or forming a strong hold nationalist base, as
> Putin, Erdogan, Orban etc.
> 
> In this picture, Soros is, unlike Volcker, not only an organic
> intellectual (as a reflexive-system theorist) but he also is an active
> class agency and structure in flesh and blood, between the fractions
> of finance capital. He is a money dealing capitalist, which might have
> investor clients with closer ties to the industry, putting his money
> both in giant industrial investments etc. This puts him into contact
> with the OBOR and Industrial Internet consortium, Cisco and IBM, Intel
> etc. vs. Googles, Facebooks, and others. Yet he still has the ability
> to play like the letter fraction, which is the owners of Wall Street
> giants like Morgan, Sachs, part of Rockefeller and Rothschild etc. So,
> I bet if one go through Soros’ largest investors, one would find those
> corporations that have closer ties to the industry, while their money
> is also invested whatever brings more and easier money including wars
> and military industrial complex, or Google.
> 
> well I am sure I can’t change Jaromil your view but I hope this would
> sound better to others; more like a class analysis of a conspiracy
> then a stupid conspiracy-theory..
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: