Fascism in America?

While I like Alex and a lot of what he says, I am growing more leery of him as time goes on. He sounds EXTREMELY enamored with the clamor of revolution.

I'd be careful not to take 100 percent of alexjones (or anyone else's) commentary as fact. Some of his commentary holds water while quite a bit of it seems devised with the intent to plant the seed of doubt (or even fear) in the listener to provide an idealogical pivot point for himself and his arguments to germinate. Problem is that a lot of his points aren't capable of being proven or disproven.


There seems to be a LOT of conspiracy theory going on.


For example, Alex has attempted to make the claim (and to paraphrase):

"Bilderberg controls the world, politically... and is the new world order..."

While there is proof that Bilderberg exists, there is little we can do to verify the validity of this statement. (I think Alex counts on this.) On one hand, Bilderberg is comprised of very influential people in many different areas. But how far does the reach of 150 influential people actually extend? Are these truly the owners of the world? I find it very hard to believe that 150 people (no matter how influential) control everything that happens across the board.
Perhaps bilberberg, in Jones' arguments, is not meant to be taken literally, but as a symbolic representation of elite small-group politics across the world- a hypothetical and very small and exclusive group with an agenda to push that we, the common people of the united states (or wherever), have no say in. If this is the case, Alex doesn't differentiate between figurative and literal meaning. This is where I find major issue with Alex Jones. He often speaks his point in such a way that is exceptionally vague to give himself argumentative wiggle room later on. I find him backpedaling at times and changing the wording of previous arguments to cash in on current events. It hurts his credibility, imo.

It is difficult to provide only one side of the information and expect your audience to develop a fully rounded perspective of the bigger picture. I think Alex knows this. Because of this I look at him as unnecessarily manipulative, if not well-meaning. If an argument of something is inherently true, then it just is. You can provide all sides of an argument and not harm your point if there is truth to it.

Another major gripe is that I get the idea that Alex is a fear-monger- that he is just stirring shit up and frightening people with unverifiable statements so that some of his absolutely outlandish predictions might actually come true. Scaring people into a frenzy with misinformation (by telling them that the world's food supply is going to run out at so and so date) is a very old political tradition and Alex seems to understand and implement the psychology behind this with relative ease. Again, if there is inherent truth behind one's points, then there is no need for this type of dishonest behavior.

The thing to ask ourselves about the current situation in our world... should we be scared? Or should we be as scared as Alex believes we should be... Maybe.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

That post was the abridged version.

Wait a minute... are you actually lecturing ME on being long-winded? Ah! You were being ironic.

How ya doing, buddy?

Well, if someone wanted to read a long and pointless anaylsis, there it is.

I am considerate like that.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.