Comments by "" (@TheDavidlloydjones) on "New York Times Podcasts" channel.

  1. 14
  2. 9
  3. 6
  4. 5
  5. 5
  6. 5
  7. 4
  8. 4
  9. You were doing fine, right up to that first period, Red. 'Course a lot of people on the left and on the right can get their facts straight, too, Red. But that's not the pose you want to strike today, is it? Competent? Incompetents? Both kinds are everywhere, Red. Did you skip school the day Mrs O'Malley taught about that rah-rah marketing rally the drinks folks had up in Boston Harbour? Sumpthin' about the the big business interests over in London trying to make the locals' drinks sell for uncompetitive prices. First, the, ahem, rather enthusiastic new republic folks kicked out the London stooges and then they set to building fast -- and stunningly beautiful -- clipper ships, to take over the Chinese tea trade for themselves. It's a tough sail, but if you have a commanding technology, you can get to tea country faster around Cape Horn than you can by way of half a dozen middlemen round India. And Africa. And the the Barbary pirates that the Americans' Jefferson had to help the poor losing Lloyds of London grifters* with. What's your theory of how to build a new country, Red? The financial base of finance is finance, Red, is how it seems to me. __________________________________________________ * Every American and every business operator, but I repeat myself, knows that insurance is an important part of business. Those Hessians in London knew how to sell it, but they take a thick slice off the top. The working people in the new republic had to buy it, but they did't have to like the guy whose life of luxury they're supporting. Then, hmmm, Lordy me, but this John Hancock guy figgered out a bit about insurance. You might know about him. (From a teacher a few years after poor Mrs grade school grind O'Malley, perhaps?) His name is on that Declaration of Independence you may have heard about.
    4
  10. 4
  11. 2
  12. 2
  13. 2
  14. 2
  15. 2
  16. 2
  17. 2
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. Poor Tv, 1933 is the wrong year for you to be identifying the clear visible model of Fascism. (Your lower-case "fascism" is just undergraduates on their second beer -- but that makes it, too, impossible to identify with Hitler's swearing in, 92 years ago next fortnight.) Governnance symbolised by the fasces was Roman, or Etruscan if you like, around 630~625 B.C.E. It turns up again from time to time, wherever people tried to claim Rome as their inspiration, down through the centuries. Corporate statism is to my mind is more representative of German governance under Hitler's heavy handed international, naturally called "National," free enterprise, amusingly parading itself as "Socialism." As a political theory, this grew up in the shadow of a Roman Catholic Church intellectually threatened by the superior minds of Moslem North Africa and their magnificent universities. It "flowered," if that's the word, in the 13th or 14th centuries of our era. It was a shallow pastiche of odds and ends, (corporate statism, not Moslem thought, its enemy), occasionally taking a break from burning a heretic or ten in an auto-da-fé to go back to its Podunk Chamber of Commerce as Usual sort of analysis. It was foundational material both for the Nazis and for Mussolini, whom Hitler seems to have looked up to, correctly imho, as his mental superior. 'Course a competition between Mussolini and the Bavarian Beer Hall Bunch for the Wharton/Kennedy-School Prize in Theory of Industrial Societies' Governance is a hard, tight race. Thundering neck and neck down the stretch, Shoppers' Week versus Hollywood Secrets . But with guns and farm policy, not fur coats nor suites in Las Vegas and Atlantic City. The medievals could build Notre Dame. The Axis gang of half wits sure did crush the vegetable stands of London's East End. So, to answer you sightly strange jape, No, nothing around here is your "the definition of fascism." For your "the term is meaningless," do you think "PoorTVliet" might win the door prize? Seriously, child, What are you trying to say?? And how do you think you're helping your country or yourself, blubbering away like that?
    1
  47. 1