10 replies to this topic

[duke_Qa]

http://www.guardian....tion-youth-rage
http://www.forbes.co...obal-class-war/

Found these articles to hit the nail pretty well. We've listened for too long to people that have had certain ideas of what is good, but they have not reached their milestones.

Certainly, the strident promoters of globalisation – politicians, big businessmen, and journalists – will have to work much harder now to bamboozle their audiences.

For years now, the mantra of "economic growth" justified government interventions on behalf of big business and investors with generous tax breaks (and, in the west, the rescue of criminally reckless investors and speculators with massive bailouts at the taxpayer's expense). The fact that a few people get very rich while a majority remains poor seemed of little importance as long as the GDP figures looked impressive.

In heavily populated countries like India, even a small number of people moving into the middle class made for an awe-inspiring spectacle. Helped by an entertainment-obsessed and "patriotic" corporate media, you could easily ignore the bad news – the suicides, for instance, of hundreds of thousands of farmers in the last decade. However, the carefully maintained illusions of globalisation shattered when even its putative beneficiaries – the educated and aspiring classes – began to hurt from high inflation, decreasing access to education and other opportunities for upward mobility.

Economic growth is no defence against the frustration of the semi-empowered. The economies of both India and Israel have recorded dramatic growth, especially in their service sectors, in recent years. But inequality has also grown spectacularly. The Financial Times, which recently compared India's oligarchic business families to Russia's mafia-capitalists, pointed out two weeks ago that "the 10 largest business families in Israel own about 30% of the stock market value" while one quarter of Israeli families live below the poverty line.

But modern society cannot run according to the individualist credo of Ayn Rand; economic systems, to be credible and socially sustainable, must deliver results to the vast majority of citizens. If capitalism cannot do that expect more outbreaks of violence and greater levels of political alienation — not only in Britain but across most of the world’s leading countries, including the U.S.

That last sentence there is very defining of our situation. If our governments are unable to support the majority of its population, why would the majority of the population care to uphold the system?

[Ash]

There is, unfortunately, little choice in the matter for those at the bottom of the box. How do you propose to unite all those people who make up the majority of the population in working against the system? More importantly, how do you propose that they aren't to be put down by the moneyed few who hold all the power and most importantly have the measures in place to maintain the order and the status quo?

Don't be fooled by those articles that claim that the London riots are symptomatic of a disaffected and disillusioned younger generation: They aren't. They're symptomatic of a justice system that does nothing to bring anyone to justice, and they're symptomatic of a Dolist underclass who are pandered to and given free handouts with no recourse and without education worth a shit, and for whom being workless, useless and often criminal is a trait that's been bred into successive generations. And society as a whole has basically engineered this to be the case, and to be self-perpetuating. One merely has to watch daytime British TV, such as Jeremy Kyle, to see this in working action.

There's no incentive to take pride in oneself in the UK anymore. There's no real incentive to go out and work (the pay's so shit that benefits are the better option - or the pay's so shit that you receive benefits as well so what's the point?), the education's not great meaning that getting out of the rut's next to impossible, the justice system means that there won't be any comeback for indiscretions and that underclass of society has become so apathetic that there's no real want to escape it and that the parents have no real desire to inspire or discipline their kids to become anything better.

[duke_Qa]

There is, unfortunately, little choice in the matter for those at the bottom of the box. How do you propose to unite all those people who make up the majority of the population in working against the system? More importantly, how do you propose that they aren't to be put down by the moneyed few who hold all the power and most importantly have the measures in place to maintain the order and the status quo?

Arab spring-->Western Spring. 200 million Americans did not vote in the last election, most likely because of apathy. If you got that powder-keg burning, it would be a massive event. Corruption is what caused the Arab spring, and no matter how many well-payed soldiers the ruling party has, they usually draw the line at firing at unarmed civillians somewhere(I guess I will let you not comment on that one in case you get found out after the "big revolution" ). Besides, communists have been very territorial about the word revolution, and I guess western capitalistic governments had nothing to lose on gluing the word revolution onto communist. There can be social-democratic revolutions, anti-corruption revolutions, right-wing populist revolutions etc etc. It just depends on how far the government is willing to kick the dog to keep their status.

Don't be fooled by those articles that claim that the London riots are symptomatic of a disaffected and disillusioned younger generation: They aren't. They're symptomatic of a justice system that does nothing to bring anyone to justice, and they're symptomatic of a Dolist underclass who are pandered to and given free handouts with no recourse and without education worth a shit, and for whom being workless, useless and often criminal is a trait that's been bred into successive generations. And society as a whole has basically engineered this to be the case, and to be self-perpetuating

Never said they were right(think i mentioned in another article these are "worthless" people with little hope of saving - But its not their fault, its yours and your society's apathy towards their situation), but they are a symptom of a national/international mood that those with no jobs and nothing to lose would be quick to pick up on. it's just a matter of time before someone starts a routine that works much better. Just look at Israel with the 400k demonstrators campaigning against high house-prices and wage discrepancies. Something like that is likely to happen the day the middle class gets tired of the shit. All you need is a few good orators and a communication system outside instant government control to start something like that.

There's no incentive to take pride in oneself in the UK anymore. There's no real incentive to go out and work (the pay's so shit that benefits are the better option - or the pay's so shit that you receive benefits as well so what's the point?), the education's not great meaning that getting out of the rut's next to impossible, the justice system means that there won't be any comeback for indiscretions and that underclass of society has become so apathetic that there's no real want to escape it and that the parents have no real desire to inspire or discipline their kids to become anything better.

There is both a lack of care and inspirational leadership from above, and honor and willingness to become a part of something bigger from below. Dugnad is one of those Norwegian words that does not exists in English, but is very defining of the social-democratic spirit(barn raising being a close one). A bunch of people gathers together for some work, and for their time gets a free meal at the end of the day. In bad times the politicians say we have to get together in a great dugnad to fix a problem, and people see the advantage of it because everybody that can helps out at a dugnad because its for a common good. This I believe is what many nations caught in the economic turmoil lacks. They think "shit->mineminemine!" instead of "shit-> lets fix this shit people!".

Pure uncontained capitalism kills a lot of these old cooperative attitudes, and when you need them nobody remembers them.

[Ash]

Never said they were right(think i mentioned in another article these are "worthless" people with little hope of saving - But its not their fault, its yours and your society's apathy towards their situation), but they are a symptom of a national/international mood that those with no jobs and nothing to lose would be quick to pick up on.

The "worthless" people can't just blame the society for their being dolist criminals. They wouldn't take even a good opportunity to go straight and get a job. Why? They have no morals, no social ethic and no work ethic. They steal benefits from the working (and from those out of work or who have fallen on hard times who actually deserve it), then generally they steal televisions and laptops from those self-same people's houses. How many people do you think get locked up who actually work for a living? Vanishingly few. And if they do you usually know what they've come in for - usually drink-drive or false accounting.

Now, those who generally get thought of as 'liberals' (but who I just call the 'human rights brigade', to prevent the word 'liberal', which in its more appropriate usage tends to mean one who is against the all-pervasiveness of the state into civic freedoms - a stance of which I am mostly in favour despite my chosen profession - becoming a pejorative) would argue that their lack of income opportunities drive them to commit crime. Where I would personally disagree. Their lack of income opportunities drive them to the dole, where they and their children and their children's children realise that there is a perfect opportunity to sponge a free life with no recourse (and therefore no incentive toward self-betterment). Their being the spawn of criminals, and being brought up to be criminals (or simply not brought up at all) leads them to be criminals. And no amount of wishy-washy rhetoric about rehabilitation being the way forward and prison not working is going to change that set of facts one iota.

It's just a matter of time before someone starts a routine that works much better. Just look at Israel with the 400k demonstrators campaigning against high house-prices and wage discrepancies. Something like that is likely to happen the day the middle class gets tired of the shit. All you need is a few good orators and a communication system outside instant government control to start something like that.

When the day comes, I'll be standing on the thin blue line physically, but I'll be on the picket line mentally! But unfortunately apathy prevents what you're saying. As does conformity. As does people thinking nothing can change. And they're right. When your government has the British government's disheartening habit of sticking up the middle finger to its people before putting its hands over its ears and yelling 'LA LA LA WE'RE NOT LISTENING', not to mention of being so far out of touch with the British people that one wonders if the Palace of Westminster isn't actually located on Ganymede, there's really no way else to feel.

There is both a lack of care and inspirational leadership from above, and honor and willingness to become a part of something bigger from below.

Can't say as I disagree with a word of this, to be fair. I think this is what Scameron's 'Big Society' was supposed to correct. But it won't work, because Scameron is an idiot who cares more about good soundbites than actually changing anything - nothing will change. Nothing ever does.

A bunch of people gathers together for some work, and for their time gets a free meal at the end of the day. In bad times the politicians say we have to get together in a great dugnad to fix a problem, and people see the advantage of it because everybody that can helps out at a dugnad because its for a common good. This I believe is what many nations caught in the economic turmoil lacks. They think "shit->mineminemine!" instead of "shit-> lets fix this shit people!".

The only way anyone can see to fix an economic crisis is to throw more money at it. 'Dugnad' is a great philosophy in a situation like the Home Front of WW2, where there was a visible enemy with a clear, present and realistic means of fighting it and defeating it (kill more enemy troops than they can kill of yours, and produce as many means of killing enemy troops as possible). Combatting the economic crisis from within the current system is about as much an exercise in futility as the War on Terror. It's just impossible.

Now, start all the countries' national debts from zero and we're in with a shout. But that's too radical.

[duke_Qa]

The "worthless" people can't just blame the society for their being dolist criminals.

Spoiler

They wouldn't take even a good opportunity to go straight and get a job. Why? They have no morals, no social ethic and no work ethic. They steal benefits from the working (and from those out of work or who have fallen on hard times who actually deserve it), then generally they steal televisions and laptops from those self-same people's houses. How many people do you think get locked up who actually work for a living? Vanishingly few. And if they do you usually know what they've come in for - usually drink-drive or false accounting.

Now, those who generally get thought of as 'liberals' (but who I just call the 'human rights brigade', to prevent the word 'liberal', which in its more appropriate usage tends to mean one who is against the all-pervasiveness of the state into civic freedoms - a stance of which I am mostly in favour despite my chosen profession - becoming a pejorative) would argue that their lack of income opportunities drive them to commit crime. Where I would personally disagree. Their lack of income opportunities drive them to the dole, where they and their children and their children's children realise that there is a perfect opportunity to sponge a free life with no recourse (and therefore no incentive toward self-betterment). Their being the spawn of criminals, and being brought up to be criminals (or simply not brought up at all) leads them to be criminals. And no amount of wishy-washy rhetoric about rehabilitation being the way forward and prison not working is going to change that set of facts one iota.

Mkay, I think we've found a difference in beliefs here. I can agree that I would love nothing less than to see these lower-class career criminals that you see everyday get neutered and their children taken by the child-services(hyperbole). I am usually a progressive man though, and have found that good answers are easier found when you look for faults in the things you "love" instead of hating the things you hate. These people are a drain on society sure, they are however not the main cause for the economic crisis. "chav stole £3trillion from altruistic banker walking down the street, world economy tethers on the edge" is not what we are reading in the news.

Read yesterday about some sons of a criminal in America. He was in for life after killing a clerk that got in his way when he robbed a store for more drug money. One of his sons were after a while doing time for attempted murder in the same vein, while the other had become a respectable business owner. They asked him "how did you get to where you are?" and he answered "well with a father like that, what was the alternative?". It is personal belief that makes all the difference in what paths you take in life. nature/nurture is not always the cause.

When the day comes, I'll be standing on the thin blue line physically, but I'll be on the picket line mentally! But unfortunately apathy prevents what you're saying. As does conformity. As does people thinking nothing can change. And they're right.

Good to hear the UK police is recruited from the populace and not the elite at least.
Fuck that defeatist attitude. You are one special event away from amassing massive amounts of people in the streets. I can't say what will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, but we in the western world are just as much put under pressure by entitled leaders as the Arab dictatorships. We are fortunately not getting imprisoned and killed for opposing views, but we will rise up long before they start doing that on a massive scale.

The only way anyone can see to fix an economic crisis is to throw more money at it. 'Dugnad' is a great philosophy in a situation like the Home Front of WW2, where there was a visible enemy with a clear, present and realistic means of fighting it and defeating it (kill more enemy troops than they can kill of yours, and produce as many means of killing enemy troops as possible). Combatting the economic crisis from within the current system is about as much an exercise in futility as the War on Terror. It's just impossible.

Now, start all the countries' national debts from zero and we're in with a shout. But that's too radical.

And we are not in such a situation right now? do we need to start a conventional war with someone to get that "larger than life" mentality injected back into the populace? We've been force-fed bad tv, corporate oriented media, instant gratification and apathy for decades. With the event of the internet the enlightenment began. The last big political uprising was back in 68, so its about high time we get another dose of reforms considering the amount of change that the world has gone through the last 20 years.

The economic crisis is just a symptom of a faulty system not willing to take steps to improve because it would remove the powerful from the power. We will see a collapse and we will see a change for the better, that's my hope at least.

Edited by duke_Qa, 13 September 2011 - 08:42 AM.

[Ash]

Mkay, I think we've found a difference in beliefs here. I can agree that I would love nothing less than to see these lower-class career criminals that you see everyday get neutered and their children taken by the child-services(hyperbole).

Why hyperbole? That'd be the best thing that could happen to those children, and for society as a whole.

I am usually a progressive man though, and have found that good answers are easier found when you look for faults in the things you "love" instead of hating the things you hate.

Tough love. Or: Solving problems robustly instead of flannelling over and pretending the problem doesn't exist. Which is what the British government and the CJS are guilty of.

These people are a drain on society sure, they are however not the main cause for the economic crisis. "chav stole £3trillion from altruistic banker walking down the street, world economy tethers on the edge" is not what we are reading in the news.

That's true, they aren't the cause of the economic crisis. Although we know from complete experience that we, the taxpayer, are the ones who will suffer for it. Not the real cause of the economic crisis (the banks/bankers), nor the non-taxpayer who the taxpayer must support (those career criminals on long-term welfare, and every benefit they can possibly claim for - the useless scum I refer to) in addition to being squeezed everywhere else financially. The one who suffers is the one who actually goes out and works for a living. Those who don't go out and work get plenty of free handouts and don't pay taxes. I am fortunate enough to be in a job that, in spite of the massive amount of stoppages, actually still earns enough to actually be better off in work (helped doubtless by the fact that I still live at home - I couldn't save any money if I lived away from home still!) than out of work. Most people get enough through benefits that they would actually lose out if they went back to work. And that's just the law-abiding decent workless who have simply fallen on hard times. Add in the perpetually-on-benefit scum I speak about who just breed, get locked up, get criminal records so nobody will employ them, drink beer and fight, breed more children to soak more money and maybe go to the doctors with either alcoholism, drug misuse or "depression" and you have a dolist underclass that doesn't know how to work and probably the worst possible role model for a child outside of the Fritzl family.

Read yesterday about some sons of a criminal in America. He was in for life after killing a clerk that got in his way when he robbed a store for more drug money. One of his sons were after a while doing time for attempted murder in the same vein, while the other had become a respectable business owner. They asked him "how did you get to where you are?" and he answered "well with a father like that, what was the alternative?". It is personal belief that makes all the difference in what paths you take in life. nature/nurture is not always the cause.

No. Fuck him. That's a piss-poor excuse and he's using it to justify the behaviour that landed him in jail. The alternative was to know right from wrong, understand and respect that those things are against the law and, well, not do them (yknow, the way you and me do every day). There comes an age at which you're responsible for your own actions and you can't blame your parents for them anymore - attempted murder is one of those things you just can't blame on your parents. Yes, a lot of the underclass dolists are shit parents (I imagine there are the odd couple out there are decent, but I've yet to meet them) who don't give two shits about their kids or what they get up to, and that results in youths who are complete little shits too. And it's also true that the children of thieves and junkies tend to be cut from the same cloth, but that doesn't excuse or justify their behaviour one bit - they're just as fucking guilty because at the end of the day they know right from wrong the same as the rest of us do. But that can easily be sorted by good discipline in the school environment so that they understand this before they come to the attention of the police (I think America has that a lot more than the UK does). More importantly, the sanctions that are given out for committing crimes need to be meaningful and they need to hurt. But they don't in the UK. So they get out with a slap on the wrist and then go right back to doing the same things all over again, because they know they won't get any punishment.

Good to hear the UK police is recruited from the populace and not the elite at least.
Fuck that defeatist attitude. You are one special event away from amassing massive amounts of people in the streets. I can't say what will be the straw that breaks the camel's back, but we in the western world are just as much put under pressure by entitled leaders as the Arab dictatorships. We are fortunately not getting imprisoned and killed for opposing views, but we will rise up long before they start doing that on a massive scale.

Unfortunately I don't see any rabblerousers on the horizon.

And we are not in such a situation right now? do we need to start a conventional war with someone to get that "larger than life" mentality injected back into the populace? We've been force-fed bad tv, corporate oriented media, instant gratification and apathy for decades. With the event of the internet the enlightenment began. The last big political uprising was back in 68, so its about high time we get another dose of reforms considering the amount of change that the world has gone through the last 20 years.

I'd suggest yes. A good war would, assuming we didn't lose within the first ten minutes (not likely given our defence review's merciless slashing of our combat power with already-enacted effect...), probably bring everyone together against a tangible enemy with a means to fight it. How does the average man-on-the-street fight the economic crisis? He can't.

The economic crisis is just a symptom of a faulty system not willing to take steps to improve because it would remove the powerful from the power. We will see a collapse and we will see a change for the better, that's my hope at least.

They won't give up power that easily. And I don't see a way that anyone could take it from them except through terrorism and murder. And who would take up the reins in their place? More of the same. As is, as was, as ever shall be.

[duke_Qa]

Why hyperbole? That'd be the best thing that could happen to those children, and for society as a whole.

I think those human rights brigades will make a war out of it, and I generally want to move in their direction so it would be wise not to burn your bridges. In theory I can see the advantage of reducing the progeny, but it stinks of racism/Classism. Want to reduce the childs being produced? reduce the child-welfare thingies. But since population growth in many European countries have been kept up by immigration, I guess the problem is not here either.

Tough love. Or: Solving problems robustly instead of flannelling over and pretending the problem doesn't exist. Which is what the British government and the CJS are guilty of.

Indeed, but since they are run by those with money, they are unlikely to put the squeeze on those that actually would require to get squeezed. They will put it out on other classes like the middle and lower class so that they won't feel the burn. Which is not a solution.

That's true, they aren't the cause of the economic crisis. Although we know from complete experience that we, the taxpayer, are the ones who will suffer for it. Not the real cause of the economic crisis (the banks/bankers), nor the non-taxpayer who the taxpayer must support (those career criminals on long-term welfare, and every benefit they can possibly claim for - the useless scum I refer to) in addition to being squeezed everywhere else financially. The one who suffers is the one who actually goes out and works for a living. Those who don't go out and work get plenty of free handouts and don't pay taxes. I am fortunate enough to be in a job that, in spite of the massive amount of stoppages, actually still earns enough to actually be better off in work (helped doubtless by the fact that I still live at home - I couldn't save any money if I lived away from home still!) than out of work. Most people get enough through benefits that they would actually lose out if they went back to work. And that's just the law-abiding decent workless who have simply fallen on hard times. Add in the perpetually-on-benefit scum I speak about who just breed, get locked up, get criminal records so nobody will employ them, drink beer and fight, breed more children to soak more money and maybe go to the doctors with either alcoholism, drug misuse or "depression" and you have a dolist underclass that doesn't know how to work and probably the worst possible role model for a child outside of the Fritzl family.

I live at home myself, and if it wasn't for the fact that my family has a large farm with plenty of rooms and a philosophy of developing businesses and meddling in politics, I'd probably go crazy from nonsensical gibberish that they would otherwise have been occupied with. Living in some small apartment would have been hell, and I would have been very motivated to get the fuck out. Primarily because I'm not established and have 3 kids and 2 ex-wives and a massive loan on a crappy house that would keep me enslaved for eternity.

But what the fuck can they expect of us? Prices have increased steadily 10% every year for the past ten years on houses in the cities. Wages have only grown with 2-3% per year. A lack of building new affordable buildings also means that people are desperate for whatever comes up, so its not easy getting a house of your own in our time. This is the "free market" in a nutshell: very good for the ones with money, fubar for the ones who are not yet born.

No. Fuck him. That's a piss-poor excuse and he's using it to justify the behaviour that landed him in jail.

Am I reading this that you think it is the criminal that came with that comment? It was the successful son that said "with that kind of father, what else could I become?"

There are only two things that we really care about in life, feeling good and avoid feeling bad. There is no good and evil in the lizard-part of our brain. If you have a belief that the easy instant criminal way to get away from your troubles is the way to go, that's the way you will go. If you are more altruistic and optimistic about your peers and have some patience to do something with yourself, you will succeed, aquire a renown and be a trusted member of society.

Unfortunately I don't see any rabblerousers on the horizon.

They won't be in the system, not high up or in good positions anyway. They'll be local politicians and whatnot that have gotten tired of the shit.

I'd suggest yes. A good war would, assuming we didn't lose within the first ten minutes (not likely given our defence review's merciless slashing of our combat power with already-enacted effect...), probably bring everyone together against a tangible enemy with a means to fight it. How does the average man-on-the-street fight the economic crisis? He can't.

If there is one thing that is a waste of money and people it would be war. Although I guess war has been handy in getting rid of surplus citizens through the time, I think it would have been better to find a new way to get the belief in your nation and yourself going. It is sad though that the easiest way to ignite a western nation's self-worth is through trouncing some random enemy.

They won't give up power that easily. And I don't see a way that anyone could take it from them except through terrorism and murder. And who would take up the reins in their place? More of the same. As is, as was, as ever shall be.

Proper change comes in small packages. Throwing out the entire system in a bloodbath is rarely recommended, as the new ones have then proven to be just as bloodthirsty as the old ones. Considering their history, the Arab spring has been nearly bloodless this far. If we got a few millions out in the streets for a week or two, there would be changes made.

[Ash]

I think those human rights brigades will make a war out of it, and I generally want to move in their direction so it would be wise not to burn your bridges. In theory I can see the advantage of reducing the progeny, but it stinks of racism/Classism. Want to reduce the childs being produced? reduce the child-welfare thingies. But since population growth in many European countries have been kept up by immigration, I guess the problem is not here either.

Human rights as proscribed by the PC/Human Rights Brigade are all well and good in the idealistic world in which those who devise them live. Rather notably very few of them have had their houses screwed by criminals. I imagine they'd fast change their tune (from "oh rehabilitate the poor little dears" to "lock the cunts up and throw away the key - that's all they deserve!") if they were victim to that particular crime.

Indeed, but since they are run by those with money, they are unlikely to put the squeeze on those that actually would require to get squeezed. They will put it out on other classes like the middle and lower class so that they won't feel the burn. Which is not a solution.

No, it's not. Because there is such a large proportion of the British population on benefits, turning round and saying "right there's going to be some changes to the benefits system" and actually enacting those changes will probably lose votes. Labour made an entire economy out of giving away free money, and being as overpandering as they are they've basically slackened the system because their particular standpoint adopts the view that everyone is owed a living by the state, regardless of their contribution. The Welfare State was not made with that in mind. Another example of intention not quite matching up with outcome.

I live at home myself, and if it wasn't for the fact that my family has a large farm with plenty of rooms and a philosophy of developing businesses and meddling in politics, I'd probably go crazy from nonsensical gibberish that they would otherwise have been occupied with. Living in some small apartment would have been hell, and I would have been very motivated to get the fuck out. Primarily because I'm not established and have 3 kids and 2 ex-wives and a massive loan on a crappy house that would keep me enslaved for eternity.

But what the fuck can they expect of us? Prices have increased steadily 10% every year for the past ten years on houses in the cities. Wages have only grown with 2-3% per year. A lack of building new affordable buildings also means that people are desperate for whatever comes up, so its not easy getting a house of your own in our time. This is the "free market" in a nutshell: very good for the ones with money, fubar for the ones who are not yet born.

Hey I'm not saying our system is in any way perfect - far from it in fact. I agree with you about the unapproachability of the housing market and the aversion to embroiling oneself further in debt. You should count yourself luck that your wages have gone up that much - I can pretty much guarantee nobody in the UK got that sort of wage-rise except in certain vestiges of the public sector.

Am I reading this that you think it is the criminal that came with that comment? It was the successful son that said "with that kind of father, what else could I become?"

I must have misread. I tried reading it again but it still reads a little as though the criminal son said it. I didn't even notice the bit about a successful son. See - he proves my point exactly really. Just because your dad is a scrotey fuckpig doesn't mean you yourself have to be. Unfortunately it tends to be the other way, and the magistrates eat up sob-stories like that.

They won't be in the system, not high up or in good positions anyway. They'll be local politicians and whatnot that have gotten tired of the shit.

Local politicians are as deeply entrenched as everyone else and will squabble like vultures over any sort of wreckage sooner than try to start anew.

If there is one thing that is a waste of money and people it would be war. Although I guess war has been handy in getting rid of surplus citizens through the time, I think it would have been better to find a new way to get the belief in your nation and yourself going. It is sad though that the easiest way to ignite a western nation's self-worth is through trouncing some random enemy.

Or any nation's self-worth. I don't condone war - it just seems to be the only way to get everyone motivated to sing from the same hymn-sheet.

[duke_Qa]

Human rights as proscribed by the PC/Human Rights Brigade are all well and good in the idealistic world in which those who devise them live. Rather notably very few of them have had their houses screwed by criminals. I imagine they'd fast change their tune (from "oh rehabilitate the poor little dears" to "lock the cunts up and throw away the key - that's all they deserve!") if they were victim to that particular crime.

When I say that I want to keep them on the good side, its mostly about letting them have the "you might be right, but this is a special situation that needs concessions from both sides" instead of "fuck off, we will do it this way or I'll shoot this metaphorical dog!"

It is painful when that happens. I suspect we Norwegians right now know better than most the allure of revenge when we have such a moral code and mild prison-system. But I hope and think that by holding to that code even in times of darkness will give us a better spiritual peace when we rise again. Hate is such a powerful emotion, you should not let it control your life. One way or the other.

Putting hate into system makes the victims hate you as well, creating a self-fueled circle of fear and enmity between the have and the have-nots. Prison should for 95% of those in it be about correction, not training them to become criminals. The remaining 5% are usually the unforgivable ones that needs to be separated from society, as they have crossed the event horizon.

But I guess I'm just repeating my beliefs on punishment here instead of looking into yours. To be honest it will be impossible for me to put myself in the shoes of a British citizen, even less a British police-officer. Your beliefs are probably much more adapted to your current situation, and mine is based upon my civillian low-crime low-unemployment daily life. If I managed to change your opinion, you'd be opening yourself up to a world of hurt because my philosophy does not fit with the people you are seeing every single day. Those that lives by your belief, but on the other side of the medal. But I am sure that if the mood suddenly changed all over the board, it would have been possible. Now, it will just take a very long time and a few generations to get there.

No, it's not. Because there is such a large proportion of the British population on benefits, turning round and saying "right there's going to be some changes to the benefits system" and actually enacting those changes will probably lose votes. Labour made an entire economy out of giving away free money, and being as overpandering as they are they've basically slackened the system because their particular standpoint adopts the view that everyone is owed a living by the state, regardless of their contribution. The Welfare State was not made with that in mind. Another example of intention not quite matching up with outcome.

They are not a big enough percentage to matter, even if they were 5-10%, I think the turnout on election day is abysmal no matter what happens to them. British Labour seems to have found the clue that I fear about our labour party though: Get funding from The Union, increase the amount of low-key public jobs/bureaucrats which are very unsafe with conservative/bourgeois parties in charge, profit from votes from fearful public employees looking to maintain their jobs(who also join the union, making the circle complete). Increase until it is no longer sustainable.

Hey I'm not saying our system is in any way perfect - far from it in fact. I agree with you about the unapproachability of the housing market and the aversion to embroiling oneself further in debt. You should count yourself luck that your wages have gone up that much - I can pretty much guarantee nobody in the UK got that sort of wage-rise except in certain vestiges of the public sector.

Ultra-liberalistic economies have their costs in dark times. In good times they might work nice, but in bad times they tend to creak at the seams. Like a veteran automobile, you don't want to crash in it.

must have misread. I tried reading it again but it still reads a little as though the criminal son said it. I didn't even notice the bit about a successful son. See - he proves my point exactly really. Just because your dad is a scrotey fuckpig doesn't mean you yourself have to be. Unfortunately it tends to be the other way, and the magistrates eat up sob-stories like that.

Should have added "the latter" for final fireproofing. Oh well, next time. People tend to remember being put in front of a judge for the first time though. I suspect the goodwill through letting someone off the hook the first time might burn their mind enough to make them avoid getting put back into the same situation again. If it works for 95% of the candidates I'd say it is a good way to do it. Even if you are potentially letting potential monsters out on the streets again, you are at least not making more through "prison-education".

Local politicians are as deeply entrenched as everyone else and will squabble like vultures over any sort of wreckage sooner than try to start anew.

We assume of others what we know of ourselves - That's what I thought right now when I read that line. Not saying that you are all of those things, but it was sort of fitting. I suspect they didn't get there on being bureaucratic assholes their entire lives. Somewhere inside there must be a conviction that is different for all of these people, and most of the non-elite politicians around are humans.

Or any nation's self-worth. I don't condone war - it just seems to be the only way to get everyone motivated to sing from the same hymn-sheet.

We are being secularized while the church hogs all the rights of spiritual enlightenment. If we are not given a good reason to exists, you start collapsing into nihilism and anarchy. Consumerism is becoming a problem in the UK, I suspect that is also related.
Nationalism did give some spiritual relief back in the day, but it also brought war and superiority through hate of others. Today we are more globalized, but lack a true goal. The corporations/businesses that hire us have little loyalty to us, outsourcing and abusing us as cattle, giving us no respect for them, leaving us with no spiritual pleasure of being part of a corporate machine. Kaizen is an relatively unknown philosophy that could have saved us a lot of trouble, but even Japan seems to be in trouble these days so the answer is not that alone.

We are in an age where we are rational enough to disregard the church, but we have not made new goals for ourselves because we are not used to it.

War may be the easy way out, but hell, we can do better.

Edited by duke_Qa, 14 September 2011 - 10:09 PM.

[Ash]

When I say that I want to keep them on the good side, its mostly about letting them have the "you might be right, but this is a special situation that needs concessions from both sides" instead of "fuck off, we will do it this way or I'll shoot this metaphorical dog!"

Unfortunately, the human rights brigade don't do compromise. They just piss and moan endlessly, and the government doesn't really 'do' conflict with them, because it's bad PR. I don't think the 'social/establishment right' (aka The Man, I suppose) needs to give any more concessions, given the broken state that our society now finds itself in (and the riots rather go some way to prove this), and I don't think the 'social far-left' of the human rights brigade will ever give any concessions, even in the name of getting society back to a good, ordered, low-crime state.

It is painful when that happens. I suspect we Norwegians right now know better than most the allure of revenge when we have such a moral code and mild prison-system. But I hope and think that by holding to that code even in times of darkness will give us a better spiritual peace when we rise again. Hate is such a powerful emotion, you should not let it control your life. One way or the other.

Again, such a lovely philosophy in a perfect world, sadly unattainable in real life because soft touch doesn't help worth a damn. You give slaps on the wrist all the time, and nobody'll see it as a deterrent. You hammer the crooks from the get-go and some of them - not necessarily all, but some - might learn their lesson and get back on the straight and narrow. Those that it doesn't work on will at least be removed as a threat to the Peace for as long as their sorry arse sits in a cell.

Putting hate into system makes the victims hate you as well, creating a self-fueled circle of fear and enmity between the have and the have-nots. Prison should for 95% of those in it be about correction, not training them to become criminals. The remaining 5% are usually the unforgivable ones that needs to be separated from society, as they have crossed the event horizon.

Except, prison tends not to correct. Either it trains them or they're in there for so short a period that it doesn't matter. And the crims know they won't actually even serve 50% of the sentence they were given; they get let out after a third of it (assuming they even see a prison cell in the first place). I'm not against rehabilitating criminals to make them become something other than worthless scum (although I would argue that in 95% of cases you're wasting your time as you can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped - many just want to commit crime as it's easy for them or because they're so maladjusted.), but whether you teach them how to do an honest day's work or just let them sit in a 8'x6' cell all day, prison should be a horrible enough experience that nobody - whether they get rehabilitated or are just your usual recidivist, workless worthless dole-wallowing sack of shit - wants to go back there again if at all possible. As it stands, Butlins holiday camps offer less and worse facilities than HM Prisons. Why would your recidivist, workless worthless dole-wallowing sack of shit do anything else than get sent back there - he gets free cooked meals, TV, playstation, radios, company and pretty much anything else his little heart desires that he might not have or even be able to afford on the outside. Oh, and free drugs. Let's not forget them.

But I guess I'm just repeating my beliefs on punishment here instead of looking into yours. To be honest it will be impossible for me to put myself in the shoes of a British citizen, even less a British police-officer. Your beliefs are probably much more adapted to your current situation, and mine is based upon my civillian low-crime low-unemployment daily life. If I managed to change your opinion, you'd be opening yourself up to a world of hurt because my philosophy does not fit with the people you are seeing every single day. Those that lives by your belief, but on the other side of the medal. But I am sure that if the mood suddenly changed all over the board, it would have been possible. Now, it will just take a very long time and a few generations to get there.

I admire your optimism, my friend. Yeah, my views are based on my experience just as yours are on yours. I would argue though that a day in my life would make you see where I'm coming from. Your society's clearly way better than mine which would prolly explain your rather more optimistic and nicey-nicey view. It also illustrates exactly why I say our (or even, all) politicians are so out of touch that Parliament practically sits on the moon. Politicians (and the human rights brigade) all live in expensive areas where no/few criminals live. They are all affluent, have few worries or stresses, have never had to worry about jobs, are well-educated (though few prove it...) and were often millionaires before they were born. This is the 'middle-class' or 'ruling-class' or whatever you want to call them.

On paper, I am technically middle-class due to my job and my middle-income. I'm not middle-class at all; I'm working-class, both in terms of being at the bottom of the ladder and also through upbringing. I know what the bottom is like, I know how it is to scrimp for money. I know what it's like to go to a scrotey slum school, have numerous worries, have been on the dole for a time, have worried about getting a job and about job security and despite having a bachelor degree have precisely zero chance of getting a graduate job (I could've gotten this job straight from school). I would hypothesise (probably correctly) that there are a greater proportion of people with lives like mine than lives like theirs. I would also suggest that the middle-class cannot realistically comment on the way the lower class lives, as they cannot remotely begin to understand it. I can understand a rich person's life because all one has to do is take away many of the worries the poor person has and increase the quality level of everything the poor person owns, eats and does. The ruling class are not what I would describe as a representative government; how can they be representative of what there is in a deprived area? Nick Clegg is probably the epitome of what I'm trying to illustrate here:

Nick was born in Buckinghamshire (a rich area), to rich parents (his father being a chairman of a bank). He is descended from aristocracy, too, and has therefore known wealth, affluence and prestige from a young age. He went to private school throughout his entire school life. He is multilingual and did exchange studies abroad. He went to Cambridge University, one of the most prestigious universities in the world, where he studied Social Anthropology. He then studied at the University of Minnesota, by scholarship. He did an internship and a second masters degree in Belgium, home country of the EU. He has since worked as part of the European Commission and then part of the Liberal Democrat party.
Nick is also the MP responsible for the Sheffield Hallam constituency. While this is actually (and unsurprisingly) the most affluent area of Sheffield, please tell me exactly what he would have in common with the vast majority of Sheffield's citizens? Clegg has the typical politician's upbringing. Find me one thing that he shares in common with your average denizen of Sheffield and then tell me what right he has to purport he is out for their best interests. Compare his beliefs and outlooks and way of being with David Blunkett (born in Parson's Cross to an underprivileged family...it's no wonder he's Labour despite being tough on immigration and good for the police). Blunkett, I would argue, is a better representative for Sheffield's deprived areas than Clegg could ever be, as he understands it (even though he's been away from it for much of his adult life). Unfortunately, most politicians are more like Clegg in background and less like Blunkett.

Even those who come from poor backgrounds become 'richified' after so long in affluence. I would suggest that those at the top of the tree spend a couple of months of the year living as a member of the most deprived area of their constituency. Likewise, let them live on that lower level of income, too, see how they get along. Let them live in fear of having their house screwed. Tell me then that our society is a good one.

We assume of others what we know of ourselves - That's what I thought right now when I read that line. Not saying that you are all of those things, but it was sort of fitting. I suspect they didn't get there on being bureaucratic assholes their entire lives. Somewhere inside there must be a conviction that is different for all of these people, and most of the non-elite politicians around are humans.

Pretty much every politician started out affluent, or battled their way through tertiary or even quaternary education. They also hold some politic-related job for much of their life and career. They therefore become very familiar with their bureaucracy of choice and don't do much to ease it.

[duke_Qa]

Unfortunately, the human rights brigade don't do compromise. They just piss and moan endlessly, and the government doesn't really 'do' conflict with them, because it's bad PR. I don't think the 'social/establishment right' (aka The Man, I suppose) needs to give any more concessions, given the broken state that our society now finds itself in (and the riots rather go some way to prove this), and I don't think the 'social far-left' of the human rights brigade will ever give any concessions, even in the name of getting society back to a good, ordered, low-crime state.

There are sub-dogmas within the pro-human-rights people that could use a bit of roasting. Stuff like soft discipline and no demands seems to be the biggest elephant in that room. I doubt the human rights brigade can complain if we start giving people some tough love in those fields.

Again, such a lovely philosophy in a perfect world, sadly unattainable in real life because soft touch doesn't help worth a damn. You give slaps on the wrist all the time, and nobody'll see it as a deterrent. You hammer the crooks from the get-go and some of them - not necessarily all, but some - might learn their lesson and get back on the straight and narrow. Those that it doesn't work on will at least be removed as a threat to the Peace for as long as their sorry arse sits in a cell.

That was more towards disproportionate retribution and making extreme exceptions from common law for special situations. Plenty of people that would like to kill this terrorist we got up here with as little trial as possible. That sort of person and that sort of retribution was my main focus.

Except, prison tends not to correct. Either it trains them or they're in there for so short a period that it doesn't matter.

Spoiler

And the crims know they won't actually even serve 50% of the sentence they were given; they get let out after a third of it (assuming they even see a prison cell in the first place). I'm not against rehabilitating criminals to make them become something other than worthless scum (although I would argue that in 95% of cases you're wasting your time as you can't help someone who doesn't want to be helped - many just want to commit crime as it's easy for them or because they're so maladjusted.), but whether you teach them how to do an honest day's work or just let them sit in a 8'x6' cell all day, prison should be a horrible enough experience that nobody - whether they get rehabilitated or are just your usual recidivist, workless worthless dole-wallowing sack of shit - wants to go back there again if at all possible. As it stands, Butlins holiday camps offer less and worse facilities than HM Prisons. Why would your recidivist, workless worthless dole-wallowing sack of shit do anything else than get sent back there - he gets free cooked meals, TV, playstation, radios, company and pretty much anything else his little heart desires that he might not have or even be able to afford on the outside. Oh, and free drugs. Let's not forget them.

And thats where you have a problem. There are different levels of prison and punishment. I have to say the English prison-system seems to be filled to the brim... Not a very good way to use prisons for anything but keeping people off the streets. In such cases, harder measures most be put in place until crime gets reduced or the prison-system gets adapted. Either through larger prison camps for non-murderers etc, with a lower quality standard than what they have out in the free, or through industry prisons where prisoners get to serve their full time producing goods at a low cost for the betterment of their nation(though I suspect most of those products would have to be pretty low-quality things, there's a limit to how many euro-pallets you need). Problem with the former is that it does get into that tough-love/human-rights-brigade and the latter one is criticized for being modern capitalistic slavery, which it sort of is.

There's no straight answer, but to have an optimal prison-system, you need to have a governing system that produces minimum crime. If you don't have that you can't fix it.

I admire your optimism, my friend. Yeah, my views are based on my experience just as yours are on yours. I would argue though that a day in my life would make you see where I'm coming from. Your society's clearly way better than mine which would prolly explain your rather more optimistic and nicey-nicey view. It also illustrates exactly why I say our (or even, all) politicians are so out of touch that Parliament practically sits on the moon. Politicians (and the human rights brigade) all live in expensive areas where no/few criminals live. They are all affluent, have few worries or stresses, have never had to worry about jobs, are well-educated (though few prove it...) and were often millionaires before they were born. This is the 'middle-class' or 'ruling-class' or whatever you want to call them.

I've been doing my best at brainwashing myself onto a better path the last six months, so some of my optimism is on "steroids"(i.e. synthetic but consciously manifested). Having a perfect society can leave you damaged because it is lonely at the top, and apathy and procrastination becomes much more powerful. People drink/do drugs, extreme sports and gets hooked on social games and tv/media and whatnot, just to avoid thinking about all the shit that is going on out in the world(locally or globally). They avoid pain because they can, and once it gets too easy to avoid pain, you do nothing.

Politicians are only allowed to rule as long as their rule is accepted. The same applies to the "cultural elite". If they orbit the earth, they can easily be nudged into the sun. It is mostly about getting that last straw onto the camel's back. saying this is very unhelpful("since you are not that many your opinions don't matter" is a firm belief most westerners have written in their brains), but thats about all I really can say about these politicians and elites: They will not go away or be marginalized before you are capable of raising your nation's voice against them. In these days of web2.0 and the likes, I'm surprised we've not yet seen any new political parties pop up on the internet that embrace these simple facts; Status Quo is insufficient, change is needed in a productive direction. Not your average anarchist and communist secular-zealot bullshit, no right-wing/left-wing ideology axis. Just a god-damned spring-cleaning movement.

On paper, I am technically middle-class due to my job and my middle-income. I'm not middle-class at all; I'm working-class, both in terms of being at the bottom of the ladder and also through upbringing. I know what the bottom is like, I know how it is to scrimp for money. I know what it's like to go to a scrotey slum school, have numerous worries, have been on the dole for a time, have worried about getting a job and about job security and despite having a bachelor degree have precisely zero chance of getting a graduate job (I could've gotten this job straight from school). I would hypothesise (probably correctly) that there are a greater proportion of people with lives like mine than lives like theirs. I would also suggest that the middle-class cannot realistically comment on the way the lower class lives, as they cannot remotely begin to understand it. I can understand a rich person's life because all one has to do is take away many of the worries the poor person has and increase the quality level of everything the poor person owns, eats and does. The ruling class are not what I would describe as a representative government; how can they be representative of what there is in a deprived area? Nick Clegg is probably the epitome of what I'm trying to illustrate here:

Spoiler

Nick was born in Buckinghamshire (a rich area), to rich parents (his father being a chairman of a bank). He is descended from aristocracy, too, and has therefore known wealth, affluence and prestige from a young age. He went to private school throughout his entire school life. He is multilingual and did exchange studies abroad. He went to Cambridge University, one of the most prestigious universities in the world, where he studied Social Anthropology. He then studied at the University of Minnesota, by scholarship. He did an internship and a second masters degree in Belgium, home country of the EU. He has since worked as part of the European Commission and then part of the Liberal Democrat party.
Nick is also the MP responsible for the Sheffield Hallam constituency. While this is actually (and unsurprisingly) the most affluent area of Sheffield, please tell me exactly what he would have in common with the vast majority of Sheffield's citizens? Clegg has the typical politician's upbringing. Find me one thing that he shares in common with your average denizen of Sheffield and then tell me what right he has to purport he is out for their best interests. Compare his beliefs and outlooks and way of being with David Blunkett (born in Parson's Cross to an underprivileged family...it's no wonder he's Labour despite being tough on immigration and good for the police). Blunkett, I would argue, is a better representative for Sheffield's deprived areas than Clegg could ever be, as he understands it (even though he's been away from it for much of his adult life). Unfortunately, most politicians are more like Clegg in background and less like Blunkett.

Even those who come from poor backgrounds become 'richified' after so long in affluence. I would suggest that those at the top of the tree spend a couple of months of the year living as a member of the most deprived area of their constituency. Likewise, let them live on that lower level of income, too, see how they get along. Let them live in fear of having their house screwed. Tell me then that our society is a good one.

Welcome to the middle class "war". One might say that since all low-skill labor has been outsourced, middle class jobs are the new working class jobs. Job security is a thing of the past, luxury that our parents and grandparents had. One might wonder if this is progress or decay: Inflation of competence, position and skill reflecting our education, or just segregation into new servitor classes for the ever-wealthier elite. The only truth is that the system we're living in is not designed for this new world and needs updates: All higher education cost £10k per year while salaries are so low they will leave you in debt for half your life? former working class citizens with no jobs left but loitering and crime? These are not signs of a system in balance.

Ascending into a higher class is probably going to make it very easy to forget their past, I give you that. And those that come into it from childhood are given an easier time. Clegg getting a second master's degree while abroad? where did he get the cash for that I wonder, working at the local coffee-shop? Nah, he got funds from family and whatnot's, which had a plan for him since day one. But he wouldn't have gotten there to begin with if he didn't have high standards for himself... That is usually what separates the rich and poor these days. Not heritage, but competence and high standards. High standards can also be named balls of steel if need be, but it usually looks quite a bit like insanity for us common folk.

I suspect that when the day comes when riots flow into the "culturally rich" parts of Britain, some politicians will get the squeeze and something will happen, one way or the other.

Pretty much every politician started out affluent, or battled their way through tertiary or even quaternary education. They also hold some politic-related job for much of their life and career. They therefore become very familiar with their bureaucracy of choice and don't do much to ease it.

They somehow get into it through many years of education, which I heavily suspect they combine with politics. I just got my first political position yesterday, but if I wanted to do something with it I probably should have started around 18 or 16. That they encourage the system that keeps them safe in their seats is no surprise. This is the part of the spring-cleaning I claim Britain would need. There are too many old-hat ways of keeping your position even if you are hated by 50% or more of your people...