Quote:
Originally Posted by GinnaRM";p="
The International Bankers want to rule the world. They can't as long as local dictators keep them out.
After all, that was what Hitler was - a local dictator. He was legally elected. More of a populist than a dictator.
The Internationlists hate Populists.
|
I see what you're getting at in the first part. Some radicals and dictators due indeed come to power over the popular dislike for globalization. In Hitler's case it was more a mix of paranoid propaganda, coercion, and lack of competition. It is a different world now than then. And it's multinationals that are feared more now, not the silly Jewish banker-Communist conspiracy theory Hitler capitalized on.
But yes, multinationals hate populists and much prefer right-wing military dictators. That's a problem, since most of us, I assume, would rather see elected socialists than coup-induced capitalists. One of the chief problems with populist leaders in the third world is that they often invite military coup that tosses them out and destroys democracy- usually for privilage of the elites the populists proposed to defeat (though in practice don't).
But it is not a good idea to view Hitler through the same lens as Chavez (cantrary to what DuH might think) and in theory, I think that multinationals are less horrible than dictators- provided they never gain the support of the military.