Although only 2% of my knowledge comes from socialist books and 98% from capitalist ones, my main argument is that systems thinking and critical analysis are essential to understanding the world; relying merely on surface-level or practical approaches is insufficient.
For example, I challenge the objectivity of commentators like David Pakman. Despite earning $8,000 in black money per month and supporting the Democratic Party agenda while identifying as progressive, Pakman claims unfamiliarity with certain groups such as AIPAC. This leads me to question the depth of analysis in public discourse, which relates to my main argument that a critical, systems-based perspective is necessary.
Although David Pakman reportedly earns nearly $2 million per year, he is perceived as connected to the DNC’s institutional system for $96,000 annually. I use this as an example to illustrate potential conflicts of interest and reinforce my argument for examining systems and motives critically.
While I do not necessarily share the views of figures like AOC or David Pakman, I have great respect for individuals like Scott Ritter, whose work I admire. This demonstrates that my evaluations are independent and based on critical analysis, rather than group alignment, which supports my overall argument about the value of independent, systems-based thinking.
