5 ms·
It may be but what is your litmus test about? Can you elaborate on it?
by cassepipe 5y ago
It may be but what is your litmus test about? Can you elaborate on it?
- astrange 5y agoConspiracy theory about moving off the petrodollar, presumably.
- desine 5y agoIt's not a conspiracy theory that he wanted to create a gold backed Pan-African currency. He openly promoted it. It's not a conspiracy theory that this would have very possibly undermined the petrodollar and all Western currencies. It's not a conspiracy theory that the United States and its allies have supported coups, rebellions, and the like to maintain their power in the past.
- astrange 5y agoThe people who believe this think we have constant secret inflation in the US, except they also think we don't have inflation because the "petrodollar" forces everyone else to absorb USD, except they also don't explain why other countries like Japan printing JPY doesn't cause inflation. I don't think a mere thing like what currency you use stops the FBI from assuming everything in the world is their jurisdiction.
- desine 5y agoOne other thing - I hate the term "conspiracy theory". It was literally coined by the CIA to discredit discussion of actual conspiracies. But that's just another crazy conspiracy theory for another HN thread.
- sgift 5y ago> The Oxford English Dictionary defines conspiracy theory as "the theory that an event or phenomenon occurs as a result of a conspiracy between interested parties; spec. a belief that some covert but influential agency (typically political in motivation and oppressive in intent) is responsible for an unexplained event". It cites a 1909 article in The American Historical Review as the earliest usage example,[37][38] although it also appeared in print as early as April 1870.[39] And it seems they even used time travel to do it.
- desine 5y agoSorry, popularized would have been more accurate. Or perhaps weaponized. The term did exist before then, but the usage wasn't prevalent, and more directed at actual "conspiracies" - multiple entities, such as businesses or political rivals, working together illicitly
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jollybean 5y agoThe public justification for killing Gaddafi is 'stopping the imminent genocide', which by the way, he literally declared he was about to commit. But the real smart people who have the special knowledge know that it was obviously <<insert conspiracy theory here>>. The thing is, geopolitics is messy and there are quite a number of 'factors' many of them true to some extent. The Gulf tribal leaders absolutely hated him and they (i.e. Qatar) lent their special forces more or less as 'personal vendetta' than anything. There are definitely arguments about Oil and related contracts - but Gaddaffi through the diplomacy of his son was well on his way to 'public reconciliation' to the point where there was a lot of money being made there, and it's entirely doubtful that some new, unknown clan would make it any easier for Westerners to make money. If there were an obvious and very popular contender for power who was on the precipice of uniting the nation and he was already tacit 'backed by the west' - then you could make the argument that the intervention was on the style of the overthrow of Mossadegh in Iran, but this really wasn't that situation. The question says more about the person asking it than the answer. The real question to ask someone when they are talking about 'Bitcoin' is how much Bitcoin (or other crypto) do you own? Because I find it's like talking to people in Amway or Scientology.
- anticodon 5y agoThe public justification for killing Gaddafi is 'stopping the imminent genocide', which by the way, he literally declared he was about to commit. If a country that doesn't have vast amounts of oil "declares imminent genocide", would US or EU intervene? Of course, no. Also we all know that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction".
- desine 5y ago>The public justification for killing Gaddafi is 'stopping the imminent genocide', which by the way, he literally declared he was about to commit. >The thing is, geopolitics is messy and there are quite a number of 'factors' many of them true to some extent. Yes, exactly. It's not that I know I am right, or that there's one answer. But it is interesting only one of the discussions is allowed, and one very plausible explanation is universally labeled as a "conspiracy theory". >The real question to ask someone when they are talking about 'Bitcoin' is how much Bitcoin (or other crypto) do you own? Because I find it's like talking to people in Amway or Scientology. FWIW, basically none. Might have an old wallet on the computer in my closet with ~.1 left on it, from back when I used to buy drugs off the silk road. But I'm not a crypto fanatic, though I do find it interesting.
- anticodon 5y agoGhaddafi planned to stop selling oil for dollars and sell it for gold. It would be a disaster for US, because US enjoys benefits of printing as much money as it needs to purchase anything from abroad exchanging zeros and ones that cost nothing for real natural resources and goods from other countries. Just about any country leader that announced plans to stop using USD for trade, was killed in some way. Or, if USA isn't brave enough to openly attack the country, they declare it "hostile" and try to suffocate using sanctions (e.g. Iran).
- dmitriid 5y ago> ones that cost nothing Second largest economy in the world Second-fourth largest industrial country in the world ... costs nothing
- akiselev 5y agoMore military spending than the rest of the world's superpowers and their vassal states combined... Costs nothing!
- dmitriid 5y ago1.5 trillion in trade with EU, China and Japan alone. But yeah, sure. The dollar is a worthless piece of paper that has nothing behind it except the military.