Ellen Brown Says She Has Not Spent Time Reading My Theories of Money. True. She Has Ignored All of My 21 Criticisms of Her Economic Theories.
Jan. 17, 2011
The Daily Bell did an interview with Ellen Brown.
It is a follow-up on two highly critical articles on her fiat money system.
Here is a brief extract from the interview.
Daily Bell: Hard money economist Dr. North has made many criticisms of your work. How do you respond?
She has decided not to argue with me because I destroyed her position on 31 historical facts. She responded to those, and I refuted her on every response where she did not admit that I was correct.
She has remained deathly silent on my 21 criticisms of her economic theory.
She admitted in the interview that she has had no training in economics.
As Mike Whitney says, I'm really just a writer in search of a good subject. My first degree was in English literature from Berkeley, but when I figured out that I couldn't make a living as a writer in my twenties I went to law school (UCLA). I married another law student, practiced civil litigation for 10 years in L.A. and had two delightful children. My husband (now ex-husband) finally burned out on Beverly Hills law and signed up to be a lawyer for USAID, taking us abroad for 11 years -- to Kenya, Honduras, Guatemala and Nicaragua -- giving me a chance to try my hand at writing again. I wrote 10 books on health and the politics of health, including one co-authored bestseller that sold 285,000 copies ("Nature's Pharmacy").
She is just another self-published Greenbacker. They have been around for 140 years.
I have been their one published critic in the libertarian-conservative movement since 1973. I started with a long paper written for my father-in-law in 1965. No one else thought they were worth the time or trouble.
Ellen Brown says she does not think responding to me is worth her time or trouble.
She is making money on her self-published book. As an entrepreneur-publisher, she is making the correct decision. As someone promoting an international banking reform position, she is a gutless wonder and a fraud.
She is Bernanke's cheerleader now. My view: her decision to switch sides is Bernanke's loss and conservatism's gain.