druk

Love your reply, glad to read that we are agreed on the important things.

I think you're missing the main point a little bit, the problem with Gary is that he oversimplifies everything. He bigs himself up as this decisive voice without actually engaging with inequality research and policy holistically, consistently. He is not an exceptionally good economist, however he has vast reach and a large social media presence. The problems arising from this sort of populism is less apparent while his mission is aligned with what one believes, but is concerning nonetheless. He is just a burnt out millionaire turned influencer/media figure, who larps as this down-to-earth campaigner for good, while building his youtube brand and selling a book about how he was the tippy-top trader at Citibank.

I'll look into it I guess, thanks.

??? Sorry I don't get how that follows, and I'm not. I'm not even sure how my personal political philosophy would matter in this case.

I thought the same thing, and tried to find the 2 replies. In the grand scheme of things, it does not matter though, because all three of these ghouls would say whatever gets more attention because they are amorphous blobs of shite.

Thanks for the correction, you're right, crazy conspiracy theories do affect reality in that way. I meant affecting reality in a way where, no matter how many people say vaccines cause autism, it won't make it reality. So by that example, no matter how much the right was 'projecting' about cannibalism and other stuff, that by itself is not proof, or proof of the contrary.

I'm no shill, just a skeptic. I get the righteous anger, I hate everything about the people involved too, we just disagree on what, in the grand scheme of things, are insignificant details.

I don't think I've defended billionaires, their existence is inherently immoral, regardless of whether they are cannibals or not. Also, I don't appreciate the ad hominem remark. I was just engaging in the discourse, as I am interested in how misinformation and conspiratorial ideas develop and propagate.

I don't think that's correct, maybe I'm wrong but the files released so far at least don't include that. Regardless, I'm not disputing that he and his friends did horrific things, might as well have blamed them on others. I am just saying that extrapolating that to a large scale conspiracy with the active participation of the number of people suggested is super unlikely. This is in no way meant to defend anyone involved with Epstein, they are despicable ghouls who should suffer the consequences of their actions.

Why would the right's crazy conspiracy theories influence reality? I get the projection narrative, but just mirroring what a crazy person says does not necessarily make it not crazy.

I just don't believe there was a large, organized group of people doing cannibalism and such. It is extremely unlikely that such a conspiracy would exist for a sustained period of time.