Live data from Hacker News

David Rockefeller has died

bloomberg.com

51–60 of 242 posts

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > Rockefeller upheld the family’s philanthropic tradition, giving away more than $900 million during his lifetime. In 1940, he joined the board of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, established in 1901 by his grandfather, and a decade later succeeded his father as board chairman, serving for 25 years. Rich people don't give money away no-strings-attached, they channel it for their purpo…

>When Flexner researched his report, many American medical schools were "proprietary", namely small trade schools owned by one or more doctors, unaffiliated with a college or university, and run to make a profit. A degree was typically awarded after only two years of study. Laboratory work and dissection were not necessarily required. Many of the instructors were local doctors teaching part-time, whose own training l…

Is the bar really high though? I find doctors in US for common procedures use outdated methods and charge astronomical fees.

My experience of going to Australian hospitals was 10x better.

In US it feels like doctors want to get as much money as they can from you while proving the lowest level of service possible. A very capitalist view to human life.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#52
post #43

I am, by most metrics, an ardent globalist; I advocate absolute free trade and absolute free movement. However, it's not very hard to recognize that many people's definition of globalism effectively includes such things as forced immigration, cultural erasure, and overburdening of welfare states, which are conducive to increased conflict rather than increased cooperation.

If 100M people from Africa/ME showed up in Europe, you think this would be a good thing for the world?

No, which is exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. "Free movement", to me, means that you are free to travel wherever you'd like on your own dime. It doesn't mean that you get to show up somewhere and demand citizenship, housing, medical care, or other free stuff. But obviously some people conflate these things.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#53
> The Osteopathic profession was the only group that was organized enough to survive the Medical Guild's purge of non-Rockefeller-approved approaches to medicine.

What? The Medical Guild purged (almost) all of the quacks and snake oil salesman out of medicine, and aimed American medicine to be directed by the scientific method and biology. This was a good thing.

You're right, most of the quacks, snake handlers, anti-vaccine charlatans and witch doctors were purged, thankfully. But the osteopathic so-called "alternative" medicine practitioners were well-organized enough, and legally and politically savvy enough to survive.

People on this web site tend to look favorably upon reason, the scientific method and so forth. Thus, I think they will look favorably upon this work of Rockefeller, and shed few tears for the faith healers, quacks, acupuncturists etc. which people are still free to go to, but which my tax and health plan dollars are (mostly) not going to, thankfully.

Then you mix in that primary care doctors don't spend enough time with their patients nowadays. This may be true, in fact, it probably is. It has absolutely nothing to do however with whether people are getting rational, scientific treatment tested through medical trials, or whether they're going into some voodoo ritual with some quack.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's frightening is that he was actually proud of it - he really believed in it. I wonder how many other powerful families are working towards the "more integrated global political and economic structure", consolidating the power of the global elite. Good luck to everybody else... Edit to clarify: in an ideal world what he stands for is right. but we're not in an idea world. where there's power there's often corrup…

Encouraging international cooperation isn't consolidating power. It's learning to live together on the same planet.

"a more integrated global political and economic structure" doesn't mean "international cooperation" though, it just means more free trade policies, and international political regulation instead of national.

International cooperation can be achieved without an integrated political and economic structure. My country doesn't need to have the same economic policies and regulations as your country to live in harmony with you, or to take on international projects together like sending aid to some natural disaster, or doctors to communities that need them, or to agree in standards, or to foster academic research.

"a more integrated global political and economic structure" means 1. bodies that have political power over national governments, which would make the implementation of standard regulations easier and 2. open borders for trade. Of course a billionaire involved in a number of translational companies wants this.

As far as consolidating power goes, the US and China have some pretty big fish because their economies have been on steroids for a while. But other countries rely on national regulation to keep their national companies and local economies from being overrun by these big players. Least you know monopolies wouldn't exist only on the national level, but internationally, and then what do you do? National monopolies are a pain to get rid of, those would only be worse.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#55

"Their sister, Abby Rockefeller Mauze, known as “Babs,” died in 1976." All the brothers have their contributions listed, but she doesn't? According to Wikipedia, Abby Rockefeller Mauze preferred to stay out of the spotlight, but was still a benefactor of the MOMA, YWCA, NY Hospital, NY Zoological Society, and the Asia Society.

> All the brothers have their contributions listed, but she doesn't?

Maybe related to this detail (also from Wikipedia)...?

  "Unlike her famous brothers, she always remained out of the public eye"

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#56
post #4

"Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- One World, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 4…

He also praised the genocidal policies of Mao Ze Dong in 1973. In the NYTimes, no less: "The social experiment in China under. Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history. How extensively China opens up and how the world interprets and reacts to the social innovations and life styles she has developed is certain to have a profound impact on the future of many nations." http:…

Fake news. Nowhere there does he advocate genocide.

In 1973, most people probably weren't aware of the humanitarian crises that happened in China since the Communists took over.

That's right when Nixon visited and was re-establishing friendly relations there. Most people were unaware of the happenings inside China. They were hoping to establish better ties in order to promote cultural exchange. Thus, praising Mao at that time is not out of the ordinary.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#57
post #4

"Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- One World, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 4…

From the article: > Rockefeller upheld the family’s philanthropic tradition, giving away more than $900 million during his lifetime. In 1940, he joined the board of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, established in 1901 by his grandfather, and a decade later succeeded his father as board chairman, serving for 25 years. Rich people don't give money away no-strings-attached, they channel it for their purpo…

In charitable work, we often say that you either give your time or your money. The younger tend to give their time; the older tend to give their money.

Similarly, people have visions for how the world should be. The young and of-less-means tend to give their time, engaging in grassroots efforts or marches. The old and rich tend to give their money. Both use their resources to shape the world towards what they believe in.

Whether one believes this is morally right is one thing (whether the rich should have a louder voice though their resources), but I do think the intent of the rich is less sinister than we often frame it.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#58
post #4

"Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure -- One World, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 4…

What's frightening is that he was actually proud of it - he really believed in it. I wonder how many other powerful families are working towards the "more integrated global political and economic structure", consolidating the power of the global elite. Good luck to everybody else... Edit to clarify: in an ideal world what he stands for is right. but we're not in an idea world. where there's power there's often corrup…

I don't see why globalization must necessarily mean total domination by the "elites". Yes, it's a significant risk factor in that scenario, but the two don't come in a package, bound together with epoxy. It would only happen if we continue to refuse to address the issue of inequality - this time on a global scale.

Some form of globalization is actually the best case scenario, the golden path for this world. It must include some form of control mechanisms against inequality spiraling out of control - and that's just one factor among many.

A united world is the only way to significantly reduce the risk of global conflict. It's also the only way to ensure that a large fraction of the world is not dying of starvation while another fraction goes swimming in champaign-filled pools. It would also mean pooling up resources on a global scale. It would make large parts of military budgets redundant, freeing that money for other purposes.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's frightening is that he was actually proud of it - he really believed in it. I wonder how many other powerful families are working towards the "more integrated global political and economic structure", consolidating the power of the global elite. Good luck to everybody else... Edit to clarify: in an ideal world what he stands for is right. but we're not in an idea world. where there's power there's often corrup…

Encouraging international cooperation isn't consolidating power. It's learning to live together on the same planet.

> Encouraging international cooperation isn't consolidating power. It's learning to live together on the same planet.

Globalization is a big tent with lots of different people in it with different motivations and priorities. The effect is mixed. It undoubtedly has accelerated growth and encouraged stability in the developing world. At the same time, it normalizes non-Western social/economic models and tends to undermine welfare states.

Re: David Rockefeller has died

#60
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a lot of people argue that this is ultimately what makes conspiracy theories so attractive in the first place. It's much more comforting to believe that everything is under control and part of a deliberate plan, even if controlled by people you don't like as part of a plan that works against you, than it is to believe it's all just a bunch of random stuff happening.

It can't be both? Isn't that the least comforting? Not that it proves anything; People often believe what they fear is true. All you need to know is that MKUltra existed. The people responsible were never brought to justice. Maybe some of you have loose morals but I could never join this shit.

> It can't be both?

But that introduces complexity in your thought process. Most people are far too lazy for that.

Post reply on HN