Dan Fabulich wrote:
> Well, admittedly, he IS pro-whatsit. ;) That is, his rallying cry is
> a charge towards "Open society."
Yes, this is what I had though.
> > I'd always thought you'd have thought him one of the good guys. Hmmmm.
> Welll... Unlike certain others on this list who can't tell the
> difference between a liberal and a Nazi,
Which is what keeps me on other lists as I can't be bothered with that
much hubris-building. I am only writing now because my mail filters
managed to stuff up saving a post in the extropy folder and I read the
subject line about Sasha being dead, and I immediately jumped in here to
find out that it was a hoax. And it wasn't. Sigh. BIG sigh.
> (of which, let me get this
> perfectly clear, Soros is the former, and not the latter) I'd say that
> while I wouldn't call him one of the "good guys," he's better than
> most of the bad guys out there.
Well, this was my thinking. I'd always thought, based on my very cursory
knowledge, that he was pro-democracy and all those other funky
What's so bad about him? His predatory speculation/investing strategy?
I'm sort of curious, as I had always thought he was one of the few very
rich people who were making any headway as far as doing good goes...
-- mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org http://i.am/dwayne
"the cricher we kno as dwayne is only the projection into our dimension of something much larger and wirder." ---email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:10:58 MDT