I haven't read the book. I copied that quote from the wikipedia article to which you linked.
I'm sure this author that you happen to have read got it right where every other historian is wrong, though.
Of course he was likely far from the saint that second-graders hear about in their stories. Regardless, if more space in an article a supporter linked is given over to controversies than about the book itself, it certainly doesn't inspire me with confidence as to the veracity of the work.
Last edited by carlh; 07-26-2012 at 01:47 PM.
Last edited by Grok; 07-26-2012 at 02:18 PM. Reason: spel cheque
It's seems ironic to me that you of all people who abhors private property would suddenly revert to kookism and conspiracy theories when the name Rothschild comes up. Rothschild owns more property and personal wealth than any other family on the planet. It's no wonder someone like you will jump to discredit anyone who brings up that name.
So, if we're programmed to seek to elevate ourselves over others then wouldn't that include using whatever-means-necessary to ensure the bottom stay on the bottom? How do the John Galts of the world keep their power if their workers are free to move on up?
Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?