Tue 25th September 2007, 1:10pm
Chip Berlet is known for two main themes in his career, at least since the 1980s. Before the 1980s he was regarded as a more conventional leftist, but since the 1980s he has spent a lot of energy criticizing both the left and the right.
One constant theme of Berlet's is that the LaRouche organization is cultic, fascist, and dangerous.
The second theme is that leftists who demonstrate an interest in conspiracy theories are a discredit to other correct-thinking leftists, and are dangerously close to rightists who spout conspiracy theories. Whether these leftists that Berlet criticizes are evil or just stupid, is something that Berlet hasn't quite decided yet. (This includes all conspiracy theories, even well-researched ones such as the 1960s assassinations of JFK, RFK, and MLK.)
As an alternative to what Berlet regards of "conspiracism" among progressives, he has embraced political correctness in its most perverted form — the "identity politics" that has been funded from above. The Ford Foundation, with its close connections to U.S. intelligence, started pumping money into women's studies, Black studies, and Chicano studies in the early 1970s. McGeorge Bundy was president of the Ford Foundation when this began. Today the Ford Foundation is funding Berlet's group, which was founded by a bunch of trust-fund feminist types back in the early 1980s. (The Wikipedia bio on McGeorge Bundy
is very understated on his intelligence connections. For example, William Bundy, his brother, was in the CIA the entire time, and the Ford Foundation worked rather closely with the CIA during the 1950s.)
Berlet has also worked with the Anti-Defamation League in order to research rightists. He's pro-Israel.
I believe that the "identity politics" that emerged in the 1970s was funded from above as a means of countering the "power structure research" that was beginning to become popular among New Left veterans. These New Left veterans like myself were almost all white males, who figured out very early that U.S. policy in Vietnam could not withstand scrutiny at any level whatsoever. A connection was becoming evident between U.S. corporate capitalism and U.S. foreign policy. The same people were running both. (It's easier to make this point now than it was a few years ago. All you have to do is look at U.S. policy in Iraq.)
The white male U.S. New Left was crushed by "identity politics" in the 1970s. It only took a few years before the feminists chased us out of our offices. We were left in the street with a confused look on our faces, hanging on to our research files, and muttering phrases such as "interlocking corporate directorates."
Now here's a conspiracy theory that you can play with:
Jayjg in his RfA said that he was in his 40s and works in management. Might he be referring to financial management?
Lyndon LaRouche says a lot of things that don't make any sense to me. Much of this has to do with the philosophy of science. However, in the one area of international finance, I have been following him and I respect his opinions. Beginning in 1993, LaRouche and his organization have been speaking out on the topic of Wall Street derivatives, and how they threaten to push the international monetary system over the edge. This is still a huge topic, and I believe we'll be hearing much more about this in the next few years. The LaRouche people have been saying things about the greed on Wall Street that Wall Street doesn't want people to hear.
Berlet on Wikipedia has been protected by SlimVirgin and Jayjg. Slim might be someone's agent and so might Jayjg. Slim has also been protecting Gary Weiss on Wikipedia.
I suspect that people in high places know that the international monetary system is a house of cards. If and when it collapses, the last thing these people want is to discover that a few hundred editors on Wikipedia are trying to connect the dots and figure out who is responsible. These people in high places are using cabalists like Slim and Jayjg to make a preemptive strike that intends to "tame" Wikipedia on certain sensitive topics. Naked short selling sounds ugly to me, just like derivatives sounds ugly. Things that make Wall Street look ugly must not be allowed on Wikipedia, according to people in high places. I think Jimbo knows what's happening, but I don't think he started it. This goes higher than Jimbo.