Dennis King's website is gospel to Will Beback, who never tires of arguing that it is the very model of a Reliable Source. However, some of the long-since banned "pro-LaRouche editors" managed to cite King's book to good comic effect, before getting banned, probably as alleged sockpuppets of myself.

I wrote this way back in 1993, which is one reason Berlet used Wikipedia to persecute me:

Why are these globalist-conspiracy theories labeled "right wing" anyway? They mostly involve allegations of secret societies of immensely rich capitalists (British imperialists, you know?) controlling everything. That would normally be the kind of theory LEFTISTS would spin.

Truthfully the reason these theories are labeled nutty "right wing conspiracy theories" is that any global capitalist conspiritizing can hardly avoid eventually running across the Bilderbergers and historical Rothschilds and if you put them in, now you've put your foot in the swamp, and will inevitably pull it up with the ADL snapping turtles (Berlet being one of them; he's not Jewish but plays one on the internet) attached to it. The Jews claim some capitalists as (sort of) their own, and will now decide that you're talking about THEM, and in fact ONLY them, and everything else in your conspiracy theory is just codewords for THEM. Thus, any such theory, unless it somehow specifically manages to exclude Jews in any capacity, must be a fascist or RIGHTWING conspiracy theory. By definition it will be labeled that, if Jews have been included in it anywhere, for any reason. Even good reasons.

And then, off we go to the Godwin Wars. Chip will attack you if you disagree with him politically, and very soon accuse you of antisemitism. Even if you happen to BE a Jew and he isn't! Doesn't matter; he still feels entitled. All of which was exactly what happened to LaRouche's views and followers on Wikipedia. Geez, I get sick of it.

I think this is done primarily to frighten leftists away from these theories. That's Berlet's job; the only "safe" way to be a "leftist" is to ignore economics and concentrate solely on identity politics.


I think it's the other way around -- the capitalists claim some Jews as their own. As did the feudalists before them: the term was Hofjuden, or "court Jews," and they were given a measure of protection from anti-Semitism, in return for which they had to do some unpleasant chores for the oligarchy. This is how families like the Rothschilds got their tenuous foothold on high society. They also got assigned to be a sort of lightning-rod to draw attacks from the commoners that were more appropriately directed at more senior members of the oligarchy (I suppose that would be the world-wide Anglican/Episcopalian Conspiracy, a division of WASP Inc.)

Well, there's no doubt that out-groups can buy their way into society, no matter who they are. It happens particularly quickly in class-mobile America (the Catholic Kennedys bought their way through Boston Brahmanism to the highest office of the land, in about 2 generations).

And as with the Irish in America, so also the Jews. And elsewhere as well, except it took longer.

But buying your way into high society is something people do all on their own, Herschel. The rest of your argument that this happened to the Jews as they screamed and foamed and resisted, is sort of unnecessary, and I think has at least as much against it in history as for it. And do we actually care? It's not exactly a crime. Particularly not in the US! It's the whole game here, in fact.

Did I make that argument?

That all sounds pretty coercive to me! We'll protect you from anti-Semitism if you do our financial dirtywork for us? And thus the dirty work you do is not something you're responsible for? Or did I totally misread your intended meaning?

Cause, so far, it sounds a bit like the Kapo defense. Which worked well for most Kapos, but not too well for their own bosses, who were also often under the gun.

Coercive, yes, but I doubt that there was much screaming, foaming or resisting involved, considering that the alternative was life in the ghetto. Wikipedia has a typically crappy article on court Jews that nonetheless gives something of an impression what it was all about.

Here we go again -- see toward the end, where Will is revving up his paean to Dennis King.

And yet another round. Some background: Will recently completed another sweep of the usual suspects, banning a half dozen accounts as socks (all attributed, of course, to me, presumably due to expressing POV disagreements on LaRouche while Living in California in a a Very Similar Way.) He then defended the honor of the project by going on an unprecedented revert spree, foiling obvious POV edits like this one.

Now he's engaged in an interesting back-and-forth with Leatherstocking, who opposed one of his grander reverts. Will seems to have a special juju that makes him impervious to Leatherstocking's sarcasm. The discussion gravitates inevitably to the topic of LaRoucheWatch, which for Will is a sort of Holy Grail.