Glad you asked

B---- points out a logic hole in my "One World Government" anti-conspiracy-theory theory. A non-sequitur. Bullshit. There are many technical terms.

OK. Fine.

B---- asserts that: A Frankenstein's Monster implies the existence of Dr. Frankenstein.

Well, yeah. That's what you say. I say it doesn't.

Allow me to spell out my argument.

Well, it's more of a theory than an argument. Or a hypothesis. You could also call it an unsupported assertion. Once again, there are many technical terms. I can't prove it by empirical evidence, OK?

My theory is ...

The Blind Watchmaker Theory of Universal Marketing.

Money is bigger than people. Money is an emerging system. Money is blind. But it's getting less blind. Money wants stuff. Yes, "wants." Money is waking up. Money is converging into self-consciousness -- a global entity like Teilhard de Chardin's Noosphere. Money has a mind of its own. Money doesn't need the Illuminati to get what it wants. It's a rough, rude beast slouching to Bethlehem to be born. Or Frankenstein's Monster. Same thing.

There's no way to prove this, obviously. But there's obviously no way to prove a bunch of hooded figures sitting around a table in a cave somewhere control all of human life.

Stalemate.

D------- says: You seem to assume "The Universal Market" is NECESSARILY a Frankenstein's Monster. Why? Are there ANY reasons why the triumph of global market forces over religion, ideology and nationality is necessarily bad?

Good points. He goes on to ask ...

Are you some kind of commie, or what?

Well, no. I'm more of a Trotskyite. Actually, these are good points. But a good answer would be too big to post here and now. I'll get to work on it. Seriously.

Are you just talking out of your ass?

No. My ass doesn't talk.

Glad you asked.