But many members of Soros's class are very much opposed to Bush and his crowd. They tend to feel that capitalism works better when politics are moderate, low-conflict and based on rationality rather than ideological fervor - many funders are supporting left projects now because they feel things are out of "balance" and the right has too much power.
Liza
> From: "JW Mason" <j.w.mason at earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 10:47:23 -0500
> To: <lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Re: Anybody But Bush for Empire
>
> On Nov 15, 2003, at 9:14 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>> The central tendency of capital is to Soros' right - he's an outlier.
>> How many other big American capitalists besides Soros think of
>> themselves as social democrats (which is what his pal Anatole
>> Kaletsky once told me)? Soros commands lots of respect on Wall Street
>> as a brilliant speculator, but almost no one shares his politics.
>
> Huh. I sort of had the idea that the politics of finance in general were to
> the left of capital's central tendency. Not left left, but Clinton left. For
> various reasons -- less labor-intensive, less vulnerable to international
> competition, less (directly) affected by many forms of regulation. More
> attuned to the needs of capital as a whole. Some superficial evidence that
> this is so from, for instance, comparison of Clinton and Bush's Treasury
> secretaries. And Wall Street skews Democratic in campaign donations, no?
>
> (That's Thomas Ferguson's argument anyway. Maybe he's out of date.)
>
> I am (obviously) on your side in the larger debate here. But, I'm a little
> uncomfortable with the idea that Soros' politics stem from personal
> eccentricity rather than his class position.
>
> Josh
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk