From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.activism,sci.med,misc.health.aids
Subject: Re: HIV NON-EPIDEMIC11 -- Duesberg Followers Still Spouting Crap
Date: 12 Aug 1998 06:44:10 GMT

In <6qqv66$6sg$1@news.icanect.net> "Michael" <wmh@icanect.net> writes:


>>I'm not sure who exactly has more at stake here...you as a
doctor (I'm just guessing here...forgive if I'm wrong), drug
companies profits and highly paid scientist who are more concer-
ned with saving face and grants or dissidents like Duesberg,
Raznick, Mullis., etc.  I know personally that some of them have
to look elsewhere for funds.  Guess their not making tons of
dough off this AIDS/HIV thing like the drug companies or possibly
even you (again, forgive me if I'm wrong). First rule of thumb-
....Always follow the Money.  It should at least make one
question the motives.  Not always a accurate rule but worth
keeping in the back of my mind.<<


    Comment:  I would not agree.  The idea that you should follow
the money because people generally do what they do for money, is
an idea generated and perpetrated mainly by journalists and
Leftist academics.  Who, as it happens, are usually underpaid in
terms of what they could do with their intellects in industry,
and know it.  But if you applied their own criticism against
them, saying, in effect, that they must do what they do because
of secret money given them under the table by people they write
about---- they would be livid.  You see, these social critics
think of themselves as a cut above the rest of humanity, morally.
Yes!  Journalists and academics really do, in their heart of
hearts.  They the intelligencia, we the bourgeoisie (or even the
lumpenproles). They know *they* don't do what they do for the
money, but they think the rest (99%) of humanity *does.*

   Thus, it's important to remember that whenever you see that
advice about following the money coming out of the mouth (or
wordprocessor) of a middle class journalist or a professor of
sociology, what you're actually seeing is 24 karat, platinum
plated, diamond studded, intellectual, moral, and social conceit.

    Yep. Conceit so deep and so nauseatingly thorough that it's
barely recognizable, but in quantity at least as large as any
seen in your average English peer of the realm or Southern
blue-blooded old money.   You miss that conceit entirely in these
progressive-minded people with the beards and the leather patched
jacket elbows, until, as noted, you turn their own arguments
against them.  *Then* you see very entertaining snob-related
things in the way of who these progressives think they are,
and who they, in general, think other people are.  VERY
entertaining.  Lord and Lady Beaverbrook couldn't have it
any worse.

                                  Steve Harris, M.D.