Dennis King: Drug Kingpin
So I was playing a game of Chess one day. I make my first move — I move my knight. My opponent, sitting across from me, then moves a pawn two spots forward, and shouts “CHECK! MATE!”, and leaving the table laughs jovially about how that move always destroys the competition.
And so this comment comes in from Dianne Bettag, who I google and see is a LaRouche worker currently in Texas:
Your source, Dennis King, is a former “journalist” for High Times … you failed to mention that.
In part because Dennis King is not my source, at least not directly, though almost certainly indirectly in splotches and swabs. I am aware of the “Dennis King = High Times” used as a crux used by LaRouchites, their first and, in their minds, ultimate line of defense. I assumed that this simply means that Dennis King had an article or two published in High Times, and knowing LaRouche this is extrapulated to mean that he is under the Queen of England’s Famous Drug Cartell. So I go to Dennis King’s website, which I have never gotten around to pursuing, and see: this and this by way of King’s defense against the charge.
So, I failed to mention something, and I will now clear it up. Someone who is not my source for a mass of LaRouche posts is a Journalist who wrote an article for High Times Magazine once.
Do you also suggest solutions to the problems that this ‘nut case’ raises? Economics, the war? Or do you just intend to disparage those who do, thus demoralizing the population with your stuff? Good show!
Personally, I believe all of our problems stem from the public’s ignorance on how to Double the Square. Once we train the public how to double the square, the solutions to the world’s problems will be obvious and easy. Then we will be able to usher in a new Golden Age of Human Achievement.
January 29th, 2007 at 10:04 pm
If I am not mistaken, it was either Dennis King or his collaborator Chip Berlet who wrote an anti-LaRouche article in High Times entitled “They Want to Take Your Drugs Away”.
The tone of this title seems to indicate a bit of partisanship on the pro-drug side.
In general, I would suggest that your analysis of LaRouche could benefit from a couple of additions.
(1) The use of LaRouchian sources, at least as a balance for sources primarily critical of him.
(2) An honest attempt to discover and describe what his philosophical view of the world actually is. I mean, it is an easy cheap shot to make fun of the idea (for instance) that learning to double the square is of fundamental philosophical importance. But my challenge to you is this.
Can you state why it is that LaRouche and his followers think this is important. (Whether or not you agree – do you at least know what they think about it).
And if you do understand what they think about it, can you then say if you agree or disagree and give your reasons?
The same could be said of many other distinctively “Larouchian” ideas (like the importance of choral singing, why empiricism is a hoax, etc.)
But doubling the square might be a good place to start.
My general thrust is this, people like me who support LaRouche generally do so because we think his philosophy is correct, or at least preferable to the competition. That is, he is right on the great issues of Life and Mind, and the other guys are wrong.
People who oppose LaRouche rarely (never?) do so from an opposition to his philosophy. They usually either ridicule his philosophical statements because they sound strange or unorthodox, or, like Chip Berlet, they seem to believe that LaRouche has no real philosophy, just positions of the moment designed to appeal to a proto-fascist constituency.
But to understand where he’s coming from, and to disagree with it for a reason – this would be refreshing criticism indeed.
Just a thought,
-Steve C.
January 30th, 2007 at 9:08 am
If I am not mistaken, it was either Dennis King or his collaborator Chip Berlet who wrote an anti-LaRouche article in High Times entitled “They Want to Take Your Drugs Awayâ€.
Did you even read this post? As in, click on the links and the title of the article is:
HYPOCRITES! ANTI-DRUG CULT LINKED TO MOB CRONIES
The odd thing is that if I were to assume that he wrote an article entitled “They Want to Take Your Drugs Awayâ€, my response would be “um. Meh.”
(1) The use of LaRouchian sources, at least as a balance for sources primarily critical of him.
How about the issues of Executive Intelligence Review I’ve been using? “The Libertarian Threat to American Education”. Which you have seen because you have responded to. Or the book by Lyn Marcus written back when he was a Marxist. Or the biography of George Bush I was going to post on in a few days.
Actually, the thrust of LaRouche’s political philosophy seems to have remained rather consistent in very important ways, whether he was passing himself as a Marxist — “Beyond Marxism” it was called, building up the “Whig Coalition” as a conservative populist Democrat who hated Carter and liked Ford, alliances with the far right “Liberty League” as a bullwark against the Trilateralism of Carter and company and the Rockefellar financed Left, sidling behind Reagan, and today with his whole-hearted “FDR Democrat” moniker, who thinks Clinton deserves a third term.
Enjoy your ride, Steve.