CHUCK SIMMINS NOTES that George Soros appears to be missing in action on tsunami relief. So are some others you’d expect to be giving. (Via Bill Hobbs). On the other hand, it’s worth pointing out that Soros’ foundation did a lot of good work regarding the Ukrainian elections.
Hack. There must be some set of values under which it’s entirely appropriate to criticize the mainstream media for bias in the morning, for sloppiness in the afternoon, and then pump out this bilge in the evening. Somewhere, deep in The Way Things Ought to Be, Google is the only tool you need to make this sort of accusation. It’s clearly inconceivable that a multi-billion dollar philanthropist would donate to a horrible tragedy without advertising it on a blimp, at an absolute minimum.
A real journalist who wanted to follow this angle wouldn’t do so without contacting Soros. A journalist who published a piece sneering at a private citizen’s lack of charity, based entirely on his lack of self-promoting press releases, would face some harsh words. For the world’s foremost political blogger, it’s just another day at the keyboard. We’re not going to be overtaking the MSM any day soon.
“But he said ‘appears’!” I’m sorry, that’s no kind of standard. I could spend all friggin’ day commenting on the apparent grevious failures of people that I don’t especially like. (Did you know that Sammy Hagar appears to have never denounced NAMBLA? Makes you think, dunnit?)
One of the more unpleasant chapters of 2004 was the demonization of George Soros. The distinction between “enemy of the Party” and “enemy of all humanity” seemed too subtle for some to grasp (famously including our august Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert.) For the record:
In 1993, (Soros) created the Open Society Institute, a New York-based foundation that has supported intellectual freedom, human rights, and civil liberties in oppressive regimes around the world. Soros’s philanthropy is animated by a central idea: that the free expression of critical thought, such as he has practiced in his financial career, is the wellspring of democracy, or an “open society.” Soros has financed every kind of project imaginable in promoting this goal, from supporting dissidents such as Václav Havel, of the Czech Republic, to providing water-filtration systems for city residents during the siege of Sarajevo. Since he began his philanthropic efforts, Soros has given away more than four billion dollars—an amount that places him in the ranks of Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller. He has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
GO BACK TO RUSSIA, FREEDOM-HATER!
{ 40 comments }
Chuck Simmins 01.10.05 at 3:21 pm
Mr. Soros have never neglected to issue a press release when it served his interests, nor be available for interviews. He is but an example of the many, many people who were highly visible in the campaign to defeat George Bush and are invisible now.
Ted Barlow 01.10.05 at 3:32 pm
Chuck,
1. Soros cannot create an misvalued currency. He can take advantage of one. If he didn’t, someone in an efficient market would have. The market creates winners and losers alike, and it’s a poor Right Wing Conspirator who begrudges Soros money that he legally made for being smarter than the rest of us and betting the right way.
2. You haven’t the foggiest idea of whether Soros has made a private donation. You didn’t try to contact Soros before throwing out accusations. “Checking the public record” by Googling is laughable. Doesn’t it seem possible that he made a donation without seeking publicity?
3. Tell me a way to falsify this statement: “Mr. Soros have never neglected to issue a press release when it served his interests.” If he issued a press release on an issue, it obviously suited his interests. If he didn’t, it obviously didn’t suit his interests. Heads you win, tails I lose. Sorry, I don’t see the gain in playing this game.
Matt 01.10.05 at 3:34 pm
“GO BACK TO RUSSIA, FREEDOM-HATER!
For the sake of my friends and relatives in Russia, I wish he would! (I know that’s not what Ted meant, but, to the great detriment to the country, the Soros foundation was driven out by thugs who, among other things, took over their buildings at gun-point, and were clearly backed by the government. Faced with that, Soros pulled out, and who could blame him? But, he’d done wonderful and very valuable work there for years, work which should be an example for anyone on how to do direct aid.
And isn’t it a bit rich when those on the right attack Soros for his business dealings, talking of “manipulating” currancy markets- it’s not clear he’s done anything illegal, but has just been doing what the open currancy markets alllow people to do- pure capitalism at work- you’d think the right would like this.
david 01.10.05 at 3:35 pm
No, one couldn’t. One could, however, detect a desire to attack anybody who thought George Bush shouldn’t be president.
Where is Scaife on this donation ranking anyway? Funny how I never thought to ask that question.
Andrew Boucher 01.10.05 at 3:41 pm
How much has George Bush given to the relief effort? Inquiring minds want to know.
“Mr. Soros have never neglected to issue a press release when it served his interests, nor be available for interviews.” So why is the absence of a press release in this case taken to be a sign he has not given anything? How are Soros’ interests served by breastbeating how much he gave in this case? Is it only to forestall petty, mean-spirited and illogical attacks by people like Chuck Simmins?
Andrew Boucher 01.10.05 at 3:45 pm
Matt: the right *did* love it. Try to find any criticism from the right of Soros before 1996 or so.
jet 01.10.05 at 4:03 pm
Ah yes, that great iconic hero Soros. He makes 10’s of billions manipulating markets ruining many countries’ economies, then spends 100 million “promoting (liberal) Democracy” to make all his stains disappear. My hero. Soros is an example of why capitalism needs regulation.
And Soros was getting attacked long before Bush. He’s been a world boogy-man for quite a while. He got attacked for manipulating markets in England, Russia, and SE Asia. SE Asia takes the lime light because the economic harm there can be translated directed into millions more sinking deeper into poverty. Damn that Indonesia for deficit building and devalueing their currency to invest in HUD type housing and infra-structure. Soros didn’t approve of costing him profists so he taught them a lesson didn’t he?
Kenneth Jordi 01.10.05 at 4:07 pm
So, how much money, pray tell, did your wonderful Mr Soros donate for tsunami relief?
Ted Barlow 01.10.05 at 4:18 pm
Kenneth,
I know what I gave, what Sandra Bullock gave, and what a handful of other people gave. I don’t know about anyone else. As far as George Soros, I don’t know, and neither do you. In that respect, George Soros is like virtually every other person on earth.
Richard Bellamy 01.10.05 at 4:24 pm
It strikes me that “tsunami relief” is probably the worst use of dontation money today. It’s the one cause everyone is donating to, and there is more than enough food and supplies — the problem is getting it to remote areas.
This strikes me as a good time to devote to any charity OTHER than tsunami relief. They are the ones that are likely getting the shaft this month.
harry 01.10.05 at 4:29 pm
I don’t know anything about Soros. What I do know from a very reliable sources is about one celebrity who is known as a lefty and also who gets a lot of publicity for much of what he/she does, including a lot of charitable contributing, made a deal with one leading charity a couple of years ago to give them — well, an enormous mount of money — on condition that there would be no publicity at all. My guess is that there is a paper trail and someone who was determined enough could uncover the identity with a bit more to go on than I am giving.
This discovery has made me think very differently of said celebrity; much more differently than if the donation had been publicized. But it has also made me doubt that one can make good judgements about who gives what to whom without being a pretty determined investigative journalist.
Soros used to be a bogeyman of the left, jet. My guess is that was basically right, too. Only from the mid-90’s did it become clear that he was intending to use his ill-gotten gains to promote a modestly social democratic agenda in the world. His enemies on the right are pretty disgusting; but they are absolutely right to think that the world should not be set up so that the phenomenally rich have more power over it than anyone else….oops, they don’t believe that do they, sorry.
Matt Weiner 01.10.05 at 4:33 pm
Hack
Didn’t you get the memo, Ted?
Dan Hardie 01.10.05 at 4:43 pm
‘He got attacked for manipulating markets in England’- he wasn’t attacked by
any economically literate
Englishman. (John Major, at that time our alleged Prime Minister, did attack him, which proves my point perfectly.)
The fact is that up to September 1992 we were stuck with an entirely inflated currency and ridiculously high interest rates, right when both needed to lose value to do something about the hideous unemployment level- because John Major, as Chancellor, had gone into the ERM at an unsustainably high sterling rate and didn’t – when he was pretending to be Prime Minister- have the courage or the honesty to admit he was wrong. Soros, and others, outfought the Bank of England, and bet on a devaluation,
and the hundreds of thousands of people who got a job in 1993 or 1994 should thank him for it. We’ve had a pretty decent economy ever since.
Toadmonster 01.10.05 at 5:14 pm
He is but an example of the many, many people who were highly visible in the campaign to defeat George Bush and are invisible now.
Indeed, this is suspicious. For instance where is this John Kerry character, who supposedly cared so much about the direction of the country? Why has he stopped touring the country giving speeches? Something’s up.
dsquared 01.10.05 at 5:17 pm
Nobody, to my certain knowledge, has claimed that Soros attempted to manipulate the market for sterling in 1992. This charge would be both ridiculous and (quite possibly) libellous. He sold a lot of currency, but that is not the same thing at all.
Dan Hardie 01.10.05 at 5:22 pm
Yes, sorry, shd have made it clearer that he did not ‘manipulate’ illegally any market but took a perfectly legal -and ethical- position on the value of sterling falling when it finally became clear that interest rates could not be raised indefinitely in the middle of a recession. But stand by the point that no sensible person over here ‘attacked’ him for anything.
reuben 01.10.05 at 5:48 pm
This strikes me as a good time to devote to any charity OTHER than tsunami relief. They are the ones that are likely getting the shaft this month.
I won’t comment on what charities or causes most deserve or need our money, but re your second sentence,
it won’t just be this month that other causes get shafted; it’ll be all year.
A week or so ago, when I was thinking of what to donate for tsunami relief, I had an unbidden afterthought: “Only January, and I’ll have covered my charity donations for the year.” That’s perhaps not the most generous thought, but I’ll reckon that I’m not the only one who has subconsciously – or consciously – felt the same.
I work for a charity, by the way, and we’ve already cancelled our planned February fundraising appeal, as we don’t think our return on investment will be sufficient so soon after people have reached so deep and been so generous on disaster relief.
It’s gonna be a tough year in charity land.
abb1 01.10.05 at 6:07 pm
I suspect that Mr. Soros is a bit of megalomaniac, just like any billionaire. Actually, IIRC, he admitted it himself in a radio interview I heard a couple of months ago. I wish there were no billionaires so that no one (even nice men like Mr. Soros) would have to remind themseves that they are not gods all the time.
As far as giving money – for a guy who has billions giving money to charity is a completely different concept than for you and me. They don’t sacrifice anything by giving. Giving money is like a hobby for them, like collecting stamps or something.
You collect stamps – he creates civil societies. He is interested in creating civil societies – and he may or may not be interested in helping tsunami victims and orphans with widows. So, maybe he’s given some, a few big ones maybe or a hundred big ones – nothing worth mentioning, really.
Randy Paul 01.10.05 at 6:21 pm
Somewhere, deep in The Way Things Ought to Be, Google is the only tool you need to make this sort of accusation.
Ted,
Sometimes he doesn’t even go so far as to even use Google before making a silly-assed presumptuous comment.
x 01.10.05 at 6:32 pm
“He makes 10’s of billions manipulating markets ruining many countries’ economies”
hmm, really? here’s a quick international news quiz for the highly selective anti-capitalists – who were the biggest speculators behind Argentina’s economic collapse:
a) US banks
b) the IMF
c) Mr Boogeyman Soros, the only Bad Capitalist in the world
(please note, more than one answer is allowed. you’re also allowed research in newspaper archives. if your high standards of accuracy allow you to approach MSM at all, that is. God forbid you might come across antiamerican information in there! better stick to los instapunditos!)
Chuchundra 01.10.05 at 6:45 pm
I’ll admit that I haven’t given any money to tsumami relief efforts and I doubt I’ll give any in the future.
A big tragedy like this creates a firehose of money to spray on the problem and I’d rather direct my resources to places where the marginal effect will be much greater.
I’ll probably give more money this year to my local Habitat for Humanity and NPR station.
cheem 01.10.05 at 7:07 pm
I’d be surprised if Soros does give to Indonesia or Thailand. He is still widely reviled there and was actualy quite proud of taking the currencies there down a peg or two. Soros made his real enemies in Malaysia, though. I’m surprised Soros hasn’t publicly offered Malaysia some relief money just for the sake of seeing whether the government there would cut its nose off to spite its face.
Andrew Brown 01.10.05 at 8:46 pm
Money spent to defeat George Bush was an act of global philanthropy.
Robin Green 01.10.05 at 8:53 pm
The marginal effect of giving elsewhere might be better at this time, yes – if you choose wisely. But that is not to say that giving to the tsunami appeals right now is not useful – far from it. Remember, the UN has estimated that billions of dollars may be needed in the long run to fully deal with this disaster in the long run.
jet 01.10.05 at 9:40 pm
X, that is an odd way to speak of the Argentinean collapse. I would have thought it had more to do with Argentina’s inability to implement the required changes in their economy. Never mind the IMF staved off and softened their self created doom. But, as you are well aware, the apologist for socialism are ever forgiving of socialism’s sins.
Comparing Argentina’s collapse to Indonesia’s collapse seems a bit, useless. It is also a red herring. Argentina’s economy was in shambles and would not remove bad policy. Indonesia was basically stable with good growth and wanted to capitalize on that growth by running deficits. We were discussing one bogey man. Bringing up a different bogey man just clouds the issue.
But keep at it X, you are a master of rhetoric and a mighty foe against those big evil corporations. Those same big evil corporations that keep reducing poverty accross the world despite the Ken Lays and currupt IMF.
The Navigator 01.10.05 at 10:14 pm
Chuck,
“let’s not forget, the candidate they were supporting was the deciding vote to extend unemployment benefits, only he was too busy campaigning. All in all, one could conclude a certain hypocrisy.”
One could, or one could acknowledge the fact that the GOP Senate leadership deliberately set up a variety of votes for the specific purpose of embarrassing the Democratic candidates – the GOP knew, and intended, that if Kerry came back to DC just to vote, and left off campaigning, they would just get one additional Republican to switch votes and side with the majority, and the result would be the same, except that Kerry’s campaign would be interrupted. Kerry loses either way. Nice of you to continue their propaganda victory.
x 01.10.05 at 10:37 pm
I would have thought it had more to do with Argentina’s inability to implement the required changes in their economy
There you go, predictable as rain after thunder. The great instamaster has forged many minds to his standards of knowledge!
Of course, suggesting any less than saintly involvement of the US in Latin America, past and present, political or financial, is only conspiracy mongering from those lazy antiamerican corrupt latino anarco-communists, such as the editors of the WaPo.
And just who compared Argentina to Indonesia? Who is talking of evil corporations? All I see is a bunch of groupies suddenly discovering anticapitalism because the capitalist in question is some Mr Soros who appears to have ruined entire national markets, no less. No doubt as a consequence of being a “socialist” and supporting the Democrats (meanwhile, the fact that the Democrats are about as socialist as Dick Cheney goes unnoticed, as ever).
Nothing new or unusual. Just another entertaining day in the right wing blogosphere. The People Who Are Going To Revolutionise The Meeeeeedia. Good luck with that.
jet 01.10.05 at 11:36 pm
X wrote,
“All I see is a bunch of groupies suddenly discovering anticapitalism because the capitalist in question is some Mr Soros who appears to have ruined entire national markets, no less.”
You crack me up. Yeah, because if you voted for Bush then you can’t believe in restrictions on capitalism. Your kung fu is growing weak.
And when you are done wanking your marxist johnson off to that WaPo article, check out the real story here: http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/bank/hba77785.000/hba77785_0.HTM
The big meanies on Wall Street were responsible for the few good years Argentina had. It was never in good shape, it just momentarily held the glorious attention of the world. So even though the IMF was simply retarded in policy advice (not advice, more like commands), it doesn’t change the fact that the economy was screwed up all along, the IMF was just there to lift it up with lots of cash then push it back down through negligence.
What happened with Soros in SE Asia is an entirely different story.
Larry Yudelson 01.11.05 at 12:28 am
Actually, Soros’s Open Society Foundation does give to Indonesia, partnering with a foundation there.
Neither have any news about the tsunami on their web pages, and Google news sources tend to be very vague in their desciption of the 200 NGOs active in Indonedia.
Given that Soros tends to be involved in long-term projects, I would expect him to be listening to what the medium-term aid requirements are, rather than indulging in photo-ops with the emergency relief team.
As for the donors: I recall reading about $10k for George Bush, and $1m for Sandra Bullock.
x 01.11.05 at 8:36 am
“…wanking your marxist johnson off to that WaPo article…”
Oh man. No parody could make up this stuff!
I am sooo suprised to hear that even in the US Congress – an independent source of news! – the True Patriots are as predictable as on the blogosphere:
“But I do want to say that while I think that there are going to be a lot of attempts within Argentina to blame everybody else, including the United States, and perhaps there are problems with the IMF and the advice that they gave, perhaps there are…”
Aww, isn’t that cute. Such dedication to one’s country is touching.
“The big meanies on Wall Street were responsible for the few good years Argentina had.”
Heh, yes, yes. Absolutely.
“What happened with Soros in SE Asia is an entirely different story.”
Go on, tell us! The MSM won’t, because they’re all wanking their marxist johnsons to Soros, the one and only marxist capitalist! Please, enlighten the public, oh knowledged and impartial blogger!
Harald Korneliussen 01.11.05 at 8:38 am
When you support a political cause with your money, saying so loud and clear is the right thing to do. People in general should not conceal their political views unless they really have to, at least according to me.
However, charity is another matter. Boasting about that is considered somewhat distasteful, and you know the part about not letting the left hand know what the right hand gives (or was it the other way around?).
Chuck S, I suspect, would be quite comfortable criticising Mr. Soros for publicising his tsunami donations, if that had been his course of action.
abb1, you’re right. Although Soros is by no means a saint, he is very self-introspective and honest, so he has made statements like that many times. Perhaps it has something to do with that Popperian philosophy of his?
jet 01.11.05 at 12:31 pm
X,
“Aww, isn’t that cute. Such dedication to one’s country is touching.”
Ease up cap, I’m detecting hyper-tension.
But while you are mocking Congress in the discussions of root problems, how to provice grants to Argentina while it goes through default, and all the testimoy that said the US helped bring down Argentina via bad policy in the IMF, you ignore any responsibility Argentina might have had. I suppose you feel the same way about everything. Then X please forgive me. I’m just a culmination of all the bad advice I’ve been given, I just couldn’t say no conservativism.
And yeah, that marxist wanking line made me laugh the instant I thought of it.
Paul 01.11.05 at 1:53 pm
Perhaps we’re being a little harsh on Mr. Simmins. I’ll bet he took time off from his job at Glamour Shots to write that post. Maybe he only gets 30 minutes for lunch and didn’t have time to call George Soros.
David Sucher 01.11.05 at 2:23 pm
It’s pathetic to hear people who are supposedly pro-capitalist attack people who actually make money from capitalism. But then again many people on the kooky Right — you see it at places like Samizadata (astute exceptions acknowledged) — who talk about things like “manipulate the markets” have only read about markets in a book and who have no actual experience in the capitalist system except as consumers.
David Sucher 01.11.05 at 2:30 pm
How much did Chuck Simmins donate?
I did a Google search and I couldn’t find anything.
•••
It’s funny (in a grim way) to hear people who are supposedly pro-capitalist attack people who actually make money from capitalism.
But then again many people on the kooky Right — you see it at places like Samizadata (astute exceptions acknowledged) — chatter on about about things like “manipulate the markets” but have only read about markets in a book and who have no actual experience in the capitalist system except as consumers.
jet 01.13.05 at 12:53 pm
“It’s pathetic to hear people who are supposedly pro-capitalist attack people who actually make money from capitalism. But then again many people on the kooky Right — you see it at places like Samizadata (astute exceptions acknowledged) — who talk about things like “manipulate the markets†have only read about markets in a book and who have no actual experience in the capitalist system except as consumers.”
Oh brilliant. So if someone is pro-capitalist but against someone immorally manipulating the market, they are part of the “kooky Right” and those views cannot be held at same time without making them a sophist? What, I can’t be against fucking Ken Lay because I dig free markets? And then you go on to accuse people of being ignorant of how markets work? Well speaking of ignorance, your hero George “fucking” Soros wrote a book, you should know about if you are so fucking brilliant about market functionality, about how to use the market to effect investor psychology in order to effect the market. He even came up with a cutesy buzz phrase for it. He lines out exactly what he did in all those nations himself, no one needs to guess if he understood his actions. So he isn’t some innocent virgin who accidently caused mass panics in order to make a buck. Never mind those mass panics meant millions sinking deeper into poverty. He knew exactly what he was doing and you are putting your dick on the block for this guy. Jackass.
Tim Worstall 01.13.05 at 1:22 pm
Soros wasn’t a currency manipulator, he was a currency (and other markets) speculator. He did indeed make fortunes by speculating on the idiocy of Governments and politicians, to the great long term benefit of the citizens of those countries, introducing a little economic reality .
jet 01.13.05 at 6:01 pm
Tim Worstall,
So if setting a max income tax at 30% would maximize economic growth, we should do that because long term growth means long term benefits for everyone, even if we have to cut government programs?
George Soros corrected the long term idiocy of SE Asia and it only cost a little short term suffering and poverty? What a guy. And using his wealth as a psychological tool to effect the market, plunging the currencies down the shitter, isn’t so immoral once you see the good he was trying to do. How many more people per year starved to death in Malaysia and Indonesia after Soros’s lesson was given?
Looks like you get a free ticket to the Joy Luck Lefty Club as long as you profess a belief in all things lefty, regardless of your actual deeds.
David Sucher 01.14.05 at 5:35 am
“…immorally manipulating the market.”
Now that is an interesting & odd phrase, Mr. Jet. Can you offer an example of immoral manipulation but which is not illegal?
jet 01.14.05 at 1:53 pm
David Sucher,
I thought I was ;)
Are you begging the question of what is immoral? Or do you not believe that market actors can not have morality in the framework of a market? If so let me remind you that markets exist in the real world where jobs lost in Indonesia equate to starved pensioners and more childhood deaths.
Comments on this entry are closed.