Re: [A-List] William Engdahl?

[M W <munkle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

ïI think Ralph is largely spot on with this one.  To me, it seemed as
though the last couple of chapters (and his recent output) were by a
different author.  The reason I questioned Engdahl's associations was
NOT an attempt insigate some sort of 'witch hunt', but to see,
ideologically, where he is coming from and understand his motivations.
I don't believe, and never have, that you can separate the author from
the text, despite what some postmodernists would have us think.
Reading the anti-enviromentalist, pro-nuclear, pro-growth arguments of
chapter 9, it is instructive to have an idea of his previous
affiliations as it reveals the type of milieu in which his ideas on
this subject have been developed.  The Larouchies put such arguments to
work, spying on and informing on environmentalist groups and setting up
the first 'astro-turf' organisations on behalf of the law enforcement
agencies and the nuclear industry.

I would also like to point out that I view people who liberally apply
the tag of anti-Semitism with the same suspicion that I view those who
are quick to label people fascists.  It is, however, now clear to me
that in these post-PC times people will react to what they hastily
perceive to be inappropriate accusations anti-Semitism in much the same
way that the ADL or Searchlight will react to what they hastily
perceive is anti-Semitic: either party will seemingly end up comparing
someone to Hitler (or, in the case of the former, a choice of genocidal
scumbags).

M

-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph Johansen <michele@xxxxxxxx>
To: The A-List <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 13:14:18 -1000
Subject: Re: [A-List] William Engdahl?

I'm backing up and taking another run at this. I read Engdahl's book "A
Century of War" a few months ago, thought as did MW that some of it
seemed unsupported, especially the section of Chapter 8, about eight
pages of what appeared to be much ill-founded conjecture, on 'The
Beginnings of America's Internal Rot', and concluded that although I
did not share much of his conspiracy-laden and in some few areas poorly
documented perspective, or his politics as I understood him, the book
was on balance very instructive and otherwise solid.

He has statements that he does not support with any reference at all,
such as "Wall Street's policy of disinvestments in established U.S.
industry began to show real effects. Skilled white blue-collar workers
in northern cities were pitted against increasingly desperate unskilled
black and hispanic workers for a shrinking number of jobs. Riots were
deliberately incited in industrial cities like Newark, Boston, Oakland
and Philadelphia, by government-backed 'insurgents', such as Tom
Hayden. The goal of this operation was to break the power of
established trade unions in the northern cities by labeling them
racist." Much of post hoc ergo propter hoc in that section of the book
that seems dubious without further development. And when statements
like that are made, explication is necessary. And the business cited by
MW about the CIA experiments in LSD spawning, as if by design according
to the context, the "Hippie Movement" and promotion of anti-scientism.

So to that extent, if only to that extent, I understand why MW would
question where he's coming from.

I accept what Engdahl says in response: " I am not in any way
associated today and have not been for years, with Mr. LaRouche. I am
not a fascist, an anti-semite, a neo-nazi, nor a right-wing conspiracy
nut as some of the charges flying in cyberspace have imputed. Above all
I reject any attempts at guilt-by-association. For anyone who has read
my book, "A Century of War" from Pluto Press through, or has read my
other public articles and writings, this would be clear."

Engdahl continues to put out insightful comment, for instance,
"Ukraine: Oil politics and a mockery of democracy" from the January 20
Asia Times, posted recently by Michael Keaney, and another recent
article that I don't have reference to, but that I found well thought
out.

On the subject though not related to William Engdahl, as to all the
conspiracy theory floating around about the questionable circumstances
surrounding the 9-11 events and administration complicity in them, I
certainly found Mike Ruppert's book very provocative and
well-documented, to say the least, credible especially given their
reckless and ruthless track record; the problem is, what do we do about
it, if true? Publicize it, and call for more information as Cynthia
McKinney has done for starters, I suppose, and hammer away at the
savagery and illegitimacy of their actions. Because they must be
hounded for their crimes, if given the paucity of present checks and
balances not for effective exposure now, then certainly in order to
keep exploration of their outrageous excesses alive for a later time
and for the historical record.

Ralph

M W wrote:

> Hello Comrades,
>
> Does anyone have any background on William Engdahl? Although much of
> his recent output has been of great interest, and can usually be >
backed up with other sources, it seems this guy has had (or has?) some
> rather dubious associates (Iâm thinking of the Fascist Larouches >
here). It looks as though Engdahl has written for the virulently >
anti-semitic Executive Intelligence Review as recently as 2001, and >
has had close associations with the Schiller Institute, a Larouchian >
front organisation. His recent book (A Century of War, Pluto Press, >
2004) is adorned with a glowing recommendation from Dr. Frederick >
Wills (a Larouchian until his death in 1993) and contains several >
dubious assertions usually associated with rightist conspiracy >
theories (e.g. the CIA, though the MK ULTRA programme, *created* the >
hippie movement). The problem is that he rarely uses references so >
even if what he says is partially (or even largely) accurate, I am >
sceptical due to the fact that right-wing conspiracy theorists tend to
> get their information from the same stagnant pool.
>
> If anyone is able to shed any more light on this chap, who I donât >
want to disregard completely at this stage, please share it with us.
> Regards,
>
> M
>
> ----------------------------------------------
> Mailblocks - A Better Way to Do Email
> http://about.mailblocks.com/info


----------------------------------------------
Mailblocks - A Better Way to Do Email
http://about.mailblocks.com/info