The Guardian on George Soros

 Here is an editorial article by The Guardian newspaper in praise, nay unashamed adoration of George Soros, a man with huge influence and importance in socio-political and economic matters on a global scale. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/12/the-guardian-view-on-george-soros-the-best-of-the-1

 I did an earlier post on him after watching an interview on YouTube and so we are not reliant on others’ opinions on the man but instead hear directly from him.

The video talks of how he sees cracks in a nation’s economy as a weakness to exploit for enormous financial gain. The consequences, sometime huge, in terms of human suffering as a result of perhaps grievous damage inflicted on even entire nations’ economies, he doesn’t regard as of any concern of his. He evidently doesn’t have to do any compartmentalising of his inner world to shut off feelings of uneasiness or guilt as he simply doesn’t experience such empathic emotions. So this it seems is a sociopath in the purest, most undistilled form.

And this is how The Guardian chooses to describe Soros’ accumulation of vast wealth:

“There are other philanthropist billionaires. But most of them inherited their money. Mr Soros made his by the careful study and exploitation of human irrationality. Then he decided to spend the fruits of his labour on making the world a slightly less irrational place.”

So The Guardian, with its assumed concern for the plight of ordinary people, sums up the enormous suffering Soros is perfectly willing to inflict on huge numbers of people through his playing the markets as a kind of game as “the exploitation of human irrationality.” What is meant here is that people like Soros are seeking financial prey, and weaknesses in the chosen prey or economy’s self-defence is its “irrationality” which he has carefully studied and now mercilessly exploits. So such naked disdain for others’ lives is actually something to be celebrated. It is a culling of the weak, or “irrational.” Again the logic of the sociopath.

In that video interview Soros accepts, and with no apparent sense of shame or guilt, that he as a teenager in WW2 very actively profiteered at the expense of fellow Jews sent to concentration camps. Their loss was an opening for him to exploit for personal gain, which seems a central theme of his life.  He says someone else would certainly have profited from the opportunities on offer if he hadn’t been swiftly stepping in, so that’s the moral issue taken care of. We also hear him describe this period as the happiest, most exhilarating time of his life. Here is how The Guardian’s editor alludes to Soros’ Jewish background - though Soros himself professes to be an atheist:

“Mr Soros has for years been the target of organised hate campaigns, often coloured with antisemitism.”

So firstly his enemies are tainted with anti-semitism. I wonder if his enemies were known to have profiteered at the expense of Jews sent to concentration camps, how they would be here described. It doesn’t take much imagination to flesh out the picture. Then, again alluding to Soros’ vile actions in WW2, the editorial gloriously climaxes with: 

“The danger and insecurity of his adolescence as a secret Jew in Nazi-occupied Budapest seems to have given him a lasting sympathy for the outsider and the underdog. It also makes utterly unforgiveable the recruitment of antisemitic tropes in the attacks on his policies and his ideas.”

What utterly dishonest propagandist garbage, and remember with a figure like Soros with his huge influence on bodies like the EU, this goes to the very ideological core of The Guardian newspaper - and Soros, to add, has found a very welcoming platform to pen some of his own articles within that newspaper. Also to again reference Dostoevsky’s line of how “With us Socialism mostly spreads through sentimentality,” and so the usual tactic of if at all possible - and they do always seem to find it possible - to triumph in an argument by shifting it from the intellectual level to the emotive, and so in here to the aid of Soros and the agenda comes the helpful accusation of anti-semitism. More usually of late it is “white supremacism” that tends to be the tool of choice.

I’m almost ashamed to even paste and subject to your eyes these earlier words from the editorial but anyway:

“The spectacle of a really effective philanthropist will always arouse indignation and envy as well as admiration, because the example they set is a slightly shaming one. Beyond that, the particular direction of Mr Soros’s philanthropy implies that his opponents are unreasonable as well as wrong. Naturally this is resented.”

Soros, to mention, is not permitted entry to his native country of Hungary, as he is considered a very dangerous enemy to the state - and thus his fellow Hungarians, who I’m sure he loves deeply, are sadly deprived of all his endless philanthropy. This of course to The Guardian, the BBC, etc implies only the very worst of things for that country. Soros and his organisations have also been banned from Russia, and you can also see an article penned by Soros “Europe Must Stand up to Poland and Hungary.” Interesting how these various countries with the most direct and prolonged experience of living under left-wing totalitarian rule are so averse to the influence of this kindly billionaire. This is what is implied by Soros’ “philanthropy”and “charity”: the directing of massive amounts of money into various channels towards the furthering of a specific sociopathic vision ... sorry I of course meant socio-political vision. Anyway you can acquire the most willing accomplices within these various channels - for instance media, political, educational, even judicial - when, let’s be crude, you have at your disposal vast sums of money to send flowing freely down those channels.

One other point to add, Fox News would of course be seen as the dreadful right-wing enemy of the ethical left as  embodied by The Guardian, but in an earlier post on Soros was seen how Fox’s presenters refused their very well-known interviewee Newt Gingrich permission to talk about Soros when he attempted to raise the issue of his insidious actions and influence in the US. He as a subject was simply off-limits as to what could be talked about.

*Apologies for the changes in font size through this piece, however they came about, and whose technical correction I’m afraid is beyond me!