4 ms·

This is a list of points without much justification. It reads like the author is just pushing their own ideology and projecting it onto what's happening to the

by st1x7 6y ago

This is a list of points without much justification. It reads like the author is just pushing their own ideology and projecting it onto what's happening to the UK. Then around point 16 he straight up jumps into conspiracy theory teritory when he talks about "money's overlords". Kind of disappointing that this post somehow made it to the front page.

alexmcc81 6y ago
It would very naive to believe extremely wealthy interests did not play a very large part in Brexit. One example of such dark money is the funnelling of half a million euro through Northern Ireland [1] to influence London voters. [1] https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-dup-dark-money-and-a-saudi-prince-1.3083586 https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-...
- st1x7 6y ago
  Of course wealthy interests played a role. And there's also evidence of foreign interference which was never fully investigated or disclosed. Those are seriously problematic. But they are different from implying (like point 16 in the OP does) that there is an organised global network or wealthy people whose goal is to take over countries and who have taken over Chile and Indonesia and are now happy to add the UK to their list.
  - ac112 6y ago
    From my reading of this, it could also imply an unorganised set of the predatory wealthy all acting within their own self-interest, rather than a conspiratorial cabal. That such 21st century robber barons are seeking to gain from Brexit is no secret. It is likely this is what the author refers to.
  - andrepd 6y ago
    It doesn't need to be an "organised global network" as in "sinister people gathered around a shady table". But it's naive to think the mega-rich don't use their immense power to influence entire countries and the fragile democracies therein.
laufj 6y ago
He seems pretty on point to me. And he offered more explanation than you just did. Care to defend your position?
ac112 6y ago
Actually he talks about "money's warlords", which from context refers to those who would have control in a plutocracy.

by st1x7 6y ago

alexmcc81 6y ago

It would very naive to believe extremely wealthy interests did not play a very large part in Brexit. One example of such dark money is the funnelling of half a million euro through Northern Ireland [1] to influence London voters. [1] https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-dup-dark-money-and-a-saudi-prince-1.3083586 https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/what-connects-brexit-the-...

st1x7 6y ago
Of course wealthy interests played a role. And there's also evidence of foreign interference which was never fully investigated or disclosed. Those are seriously problematic. But they are different from implying (like point 16 in the OP does) that there is an organised global network or wealthy people whose goal is to take over countries and who have taken over Chile and Indonesia and are now happy to add the UK to their list.
- ac112 6y ago
  From my reading of this, it could also imply an unorganised set of the predatory wealthy all acting within their own self-interest, rather than a conspiratorial cabal. That such 21st century robber barons are seeking to gain from Brexit is no secret. It is likely this is what the author refers to.
- andrepd 6y ago
  It doesn't need to be an "organised global network" as in "sinister people gathered around a shady table". But it's naive to think the mega-rich don't use their immense power to influence entire countries and the fragile democracies therein.

laufj 6y ago

He seems pretty on point to me. And he offered more explanation than you just did. Care to defend your position?

ac112 6y ago

Actually he talks about "money's warlords", which from context refers to those who would have control in a plutocracy.