Me: > > overemphasis on neoliberal ideas) and even toward conspiracy theory > > (that stuff about the Mont Pelerin group). I thought that he was
Sandwichman wrote: > How is it "conspiracy theory" to point out that specific groups of people > deliberately and very successfully campaigned for an ideology? Would it be a > "conspiracy theory" to say that the Bolsheviks were instrumental in the > course taken by the Russian Revolution? NO. I did NOT say that he actually presented a "conspiracy theory." Rather, I said that >>Monbiot _leans too heavily toward_ philosophical idealism here ... and even toward conspiracy theory (that stuff about the Mont Pelerin group).<< [emphasis added] A conspiracy theory would say that the Russian Rev. was caused by outside agitators, those dern Bolshies. It would ignore the disastrous results of the Russian Empire's entry into World War 1, the revolts by sailors, peasants, and workers, etc. Such a theory would be the polar opposite of a "structural" or "inevitability" theory which would ignore human agency entirely. -- Jim Devine / "In the years since the phrase became a cliché, I have received any number of compliments for my supposed ability to 'think outside the box.' Actually, it has been a struggle for me to perceive just what these 'boxes' were — why they were there, why other people regarded them as important, where their borderlines might be, how to live safely within and without them." -- Tim Page (THE NEW YORKER, August 20, 2007).
