OT: En Attendant les Barbares (Long Rant from Paris)

[Mike Kruger]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

<<neo-con Francis Fukiama even went so far as to argue that the dominance
of the American model constituted 'The end of history'. That was
probably a pretty dumb thing to argue>>

probably?

<< and hopefully little more than
wishful thinking but it is certain that the political, military and
cultural dominance of the USA gives alternative value systems little
chance to flourish and surely without real choice there can be no such
thing as real 'freedom' (whatever that means). >>

On the western side of the Atlantic pond, we are living beyond our means,
have a suit for a president and are shipping our jobs and currency to China.
While there is much that is open to criticism in the American cultural
system, it's hard to look forward with much enthusiasm to the future
possibility of the Chinese system becoming dominant.

 

[Mike Kruger]

"sothach" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Mike Kruger wrote:
>> I'm not sure where my children would be, though. They certainly wouldn't
>> be
>> in America. We'd have to scatter half of them in Germany
>
> I know a Mike Kruger down in Munich - is he a cousin?
>
No, except in the sense that we are all distant cousins.

 

[[email protected]]

sothach quoted::

> Right now man say repatriate repatriate
> I and I patience have now long time gone
> Father's mothers sons daughters every one
> Four hundred million strong
> Ethiopia stretch forth her hand
> Closer to God we Africans

Hey, thanks for stirring up some nice memories
from the dustiest corners of my mind.

I've got that on vinyl. I think I'll go play it now.
Oh wait, I don't have a record player.

Robert
how can I sing in a strange land (sing in a strange land)

 

[Mark Thompson]

> These corporations do this because globalisation enables them to
> undermine the potential power of the workforce in their own countries,
> turning people into little more passive and essentially powerless
> consumers rather than an essential component of the manufacturing
> system.

The continued existence of cheap labour acts as a disincentive to invest in
automated production, prolonging the existence of people as an "essential
component of the manufacturing system".


p.s. Surely it's better that the poor people get the jobs rather than us
rich people? Why the nationalistic view?

 

[Mark Thompson]

> You never hear someone saying "Well I could work hard and look after
> myself, but I'd rather live in grinding poverty and hopelessness".

s/grinding poverty/be poor

The big problem comes when there is a large amount of unemployment.
Although individuals can get a job, there simply aren't enough to go round.
Self-employment is not an option as that requires money to invest, and
earning a half-living is also not an option as that prevents you from
claiming the benefits that support an austere yet comfortable existence.
Thus you get a jobless underclass until the economy picks up.

 

[Dave Larrington]

Andy Morris <[email protected]> wrote:

> Zoot Katz wrote:
>>
>> Non, I wouldn't encourage that action in a public forum and risk
>> being pegged as a terrorist.
>
> that used to be a joke.
>
> c/pegged/arrested/

<Daily_Mail>
If you've done nothing wrong, though, you've got nothing /whatsoever/ to
worry about...

</Daily_Mail>

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Jack Hackett for Pope, next time!

 

[Dave Larrington]

[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

[Socialism]

However, I saw on the WWP not long ago that the Swedish system was teetering
on the edge of breakdown because income for all the myriad benefits and
suchlike was failing to rise at the same rate as expenditure. I should not
be at all surprised were that the case elsewhere.

Bash the rich...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
It would appear apparent, to me at least, that dinosaurs were largely
burrowing creatures.

 

[Dave Larrington]

Mike Kruger <[email protected]> wrote:


> On the western side of the Atlantic pond, we are living beyond our
> means, have a suit for a president and are shipping our jobs and
> currency to China. While there is much that is open to criticism in
> the American cultural system, it's hard to look forward with much
> enthusiasm to the future possibility of the Chinese system becoming
> dominant.

Very much like the UK, then, except /our/ jobs are going to India.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
It would appear apparent, to me at least, that dinosaurs were largely
burrowing creatures.

 

[Dave Larrington]

Mike Kruger <[email protected]> wrote:


> On the western side of the Atlantic pond, we are living beyond our
> means, have a suit for a president and are shipping our jobs and
> currency to China. While there is much that is open to criticism in
> the American cultural system, it's hard to look forward with much
> enthusiasm to the future possibility of the Chinese system becoming
> dominant.

Very much like the UK, then, except /our/ jobs are going to India.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
It would appear apparent, to me at least, that dinosaurs were largely
burrowing creatures.

 

[[email protected]]

Mark Thompson wrote:

> The continued existence of cheap labour acts as a disincentive to invest in
> automated production, prolonging the existence of people as an "essential
> component of the manufacturing system".
>

Most corporations do whatever enables them to maximise their profits
and thereby their power. Corporations are not adverse to using manual
labour as such (and often automation is simply not possible) what they
don't want is to have to deal with a work force that has any sort of
real power.

Quite apart from the benefits of having access to cheap labour
companies are just as keen to set up factories in places such as China
or the Philippines because not only will that labour be cheap, it will
'well controlled' often being non-unionised or even held in check by a
powerful police/military state.

>
> p.s. Surely it's better that the poor people get the jobs rather than us
> rich people? Why the nationalistic view?

I don't doubt that 'western investment' does bring benefits to some.
However it often means the creation of sweatshop industries, the
exploitation of child labour and so on. I think most people in the
developing world can do without such exploitation.

 

[[email protected]]

Dave Larrington wrote:
> [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> [Socialism]
>
> However, I saw on the WWP not long ago that the Swedish system was teetering
> on the edge of breakdown because income for all the myriad benefits and
> suchlike was failing to rise at the same rate as expenditure. I should not
> be at all surprised were that the case elsewhere.
>

I wouldn't say the Swedish system was 'teetering on the edge of
breakdown'. Certainly there have been changes. For example, the central
bargaining system which existed between the 'Landsorganisationen' union
organisation, the 'Svenska Arbertgvarforeningen' (the employers
organisation) and the dominant Swedish Social Democratic Party no
longer exists. This system broke down in part because of new demands
being made by the union organisation in response to the record profits
being made by some Swedish companies but also because the Swedish
economy has become less internalised, not least because of its entry
into the EU which in turn has seen Sweden being influenced by the
neo-liberal ideas dominant in much of the west. (For example there has
been some privatisation in recent years).

Expenditure on public services in Sweden has dropped significantly in
the last 10 years as the growth of the economy slowed but despite some
gains being made by the right it seems that Sweden has effectively
reaffirmed it's commitment to 'socialist' vales. Throughout the 1990's
trade union membership grew and the growth of women in parliament has
led to a strengthened support for high social expenditure. Social
expenditure in Sweden is still the highest in the world and Sweden has
the lowest levels of child poverty in the world. So all in all, there
has been some reduction in public spending but this was from such a
high level (70% of GDP in 1993) that Sweden is very much a model of
what 'socialism' can achieve and is very far from 'collapsing'.


> Bash the rich...
>

Doubtles you would prefer to see the continued exploitation of the
poor...

 

[Dave Larrington]

[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dave Larrington wrote:
>> [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Bash the rich...
>>
>
> Doubtles you would prefer to see the continued exploitation of the
> poor...

Er, no, I should prefer to see overpaid and underscrupulous bastards
(so-called "fat-cats", Premiership footballers, David Blunkett, etc.) taxed
more heavily. That's what "Bash the rich" means.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Life - loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it.

 

[Dave Larrington]

[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dave Larrington wrote:
>> [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Bash the rich...
>>
>
> Doubtles you would prefer to see the continued exploitation of the
> poor...

Er, no, I should prefer to see overpaid and underscrupulous bastards
(so-called "fat-cats", Premiership footballers, David Blunkett, etc.) taxed
more heavily. That's what "Bash the rich" means.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Life - loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it.

 

[Mark Thompson]

> However it often means the creation of sweatshop industries, the
> exploitation of child labour and so on. I think most people in the
> developing world can do without such exploitation.

That people work voluntarily in 'sweatshops' suggest that they _can't_ do
without the expoitation (not that this excuses it).

 

[[email protected]]

Dave Larrington wrote:

>
> Er, no, I should prefer to see overpaid and underscrupulous bastards
> (so-called "fat-cats", Premiership footballers, David Blunkett, etc.) taxed
> more heavily. That's what "Bash the rich" means.
>

Sorry, I though you were suggesting that my arguing for a move away
from American 'dog eat dog' individualism and towards a more equitable
and inclusive society based on the Swedish /Danish/Dutch/French model
was nothing more than a call to 'bash the rich'.

I do agree about taxation though. OECD figures show that tax revenue in
the UK is lower than (in order) Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Finland,
France, Austria, Norway, Luxembourg, Italy, The Netherlands, The Czech
republic, Hungary, Iceland and Germany. Countries with a lower tax
revenue than the UK include the USA, Australia, Portugal and Turkey.

It is notable how those countries which are most 'socialist' in terms
of taxation are also the most cycling friendly, whilst the least
'socialist' in terms of taxation are the least cycling friendly. As I
argued earlier, in a hierarchical, individualistic society that
hierarchy is applied to every aspect of life, including peoples
attitudes to others when using the roads. In an inclusive 'society'
society such as Sweden, Denmark or Holland other people are seen as
citizens with equal rights. In a right-wing country, such as the UK,
how others are treated very much depends on their perceived status, so
on the road 'high status' motor vehicle users see it as perfectly
normal to treat low status' cyclists with disdain and may even see
doing otherwise as being 'against the natural order of things'.

This in part reflects the history of car use in the UK: as the early
motorists were drawn from the social elite they expected to be able to
drive however they pleased and certainly did not expect to be held to
account should one of 'the lower orders' get in the way' and be killed
as a result.

José Antonio Viera Gallo (a Chilean Politician quoted in Ivan
Illich's Energy and Equity) one said '"Socialism can arrive only by
bicycle". I think it would be just as true to say 'The bicycle can only
come where there is socialism'.

Car supremacists such as Clarkson certainly seem to think the same way,
hence the way cyclists are dismissed as being 'tree-hugging,
lentil-eating lefties' who had just better accept that the road
'belongs' to the motorist with the cyclist having as much right to
complain about the behaviour of drivers as a beggar who trespasses on
the land of a rich man and then finds that the dogs have been set on
him. (Or as Clarkson wrote in 'the Sun', 'If we cut you up, shut up').

 

[[email protected]]

> José Antonio Viera Gallo (a Chilean Politician quoted in Ivan
> Illich's Energy and Equity) one said '"Socialism can arrive only by
> bicycle". I think it would be just as true to say 'The bicycle can only
> come where there is socialism'.
>
Interesting. Some of the right wing loonies in this thread also
recommend variations on the Tebbit bicycle solution i.e. all the
underpriveleged/unemployed need to do is get on their bikes and look
for work (conveniently ignoring that for most immigrants the prospect
of work is what attracted them in the first place).
So its not OT at all and the bike is the answer!

cheers

Jacob

 

[Tony Raven]

[email protected] wrote:
>
> I don't doubt that 'western investment' does bring benefits to some.
> However it often means the creation of sweatshop industries, the
> exploitation of child labour and so on. I think most people in the
> developing world can do without such exploitation.
>

But can they do without the cheap clothes etc it produces? No they
can't because most people buy them rather than paying more for something
not produced that way.....which is why the manufacturing moved there in
the first place.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

 

[Dave Larrington]

[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:


> Interesting. Some of the right wing loonies in this thread also
> recommend variations on the Tebbit bicycle solution i.e. all the
> underpriveleged/unemployed need to do is get on their bikes and look
> for work (conveniently ignoring that for most immigrants the prospect
> of work is what attracted them in the first place).
> So its not OT at all and the bike is the answer!

I read[1] once that Normo Tebbs was misquoted, and what he /actually/ said
was that his father "got in his Bugatti and looked for workmen to mend his
gate".

1 - OK, so it was in the "If" strip in the Grauniad...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
Life - loathe it or ignore it, you can't like it.

 

[Claire Petersky]

"Jeff Williams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Do they lack education? So what? Bill Gates dropped out of university
> and he did okay (I guess).

Bill Gates' parents were wealthy and extremely well connected. If his mom
hadn't known the right people at IBM, who knows if Microsoft would have
become what it is. He dropped out of Harvard, after attending one of the
most exclusive private schools in Seattle. It isn't like he was a poor boy
who pulled himself up by his bootstraps.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/
See the books I've set free at:
http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[[email protected]]

P.s. Further to what I said earlier about the motivations underlying
globalism Laurence W. Britt says that one of the defining
characteristics of a fascist regime is

'Power of labor suppressed or eliminated. Since organized labor was
seen as the one power center that could challenge the political
hegemony of the ruling elite and its corporate allies, it was
inevitably crushed or made powerless. The poor formed an underclass,
viewed with suspicion or outright contempt. Under some regimes, being
poor was considered akin to a vice.'

Well globalisation is certainly one way corporations seek to minimise
the power of the worker. (For the home employment market the
'casualisation' of labour seems to be another preferred method). What's
more hatred for the poor has been a characteristic of those on the
right in the UK for generations!

Another characteristic given is:

'Power of corporations protected. Although the personal life of
ordinary citizens was under strict control, the ability of large
corporations to operate in relative freedom was not compromised. The
ruling elite saw the corporate structure as a way to not only ensure
military production (in developed states), but also as an additional
means of social control. Members of the economic elite were often
pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of
interests, especially in the repression of "have-not" citizens.'

This brings to mind the relationship between people like Henry Ford and
the Nazis. People like Ford saw fascism as being the ideal system
whereby the threat of 'bolshevism' (basically any form of socialism or
labour organisation) could be controlled. Ford was also a fanatical
anti-semite so it is hardly surprising that the two were admirers with
Henry Ford sending ****** $50,000 on his birthday and ****** awarding
Ford 'the Grand Cross of the German Eagle'.

It seems that no one likes to dwell on it nowadays but prior to WW2
many in the USA and the UK were very impressed by ****** and his
fascist program. "The Daily Mail' was overtly fascist (no change there
then!) going so far as to print headlines reading 'Hurrah for the
blackshirts!' and printing editorials congratulating ****** on his
'robust approach to the Jewish problem'. The motoring correspondents of
papers such as the Times also wrote glowing reports of ******'s
Germany, especially in relation to his encouragement of a 'great car
owning society' (as another right-wing zealot with a concrete set
hairstyle would term it many years later), almost up to the outbreak of
WW2.

The Nazis were, of course, perhaps the ultimate example of the
hierarchical society. They not only split racial groups up into 'the
master race', and 'sub-humans' but applied such hierarchical standards
to everyday life. For example, the Nazis worshipped the car and speed,
developing the autobahn network and, as was pointed out in 1947 by J.S.
Dean of the U.K's Pedestrians' Association, 'the Nazi Boss in the big
car was the natural successor, to the Nietszchean Man on Horseback and
all good little Nazis were to have at least a Volkswagen.' Everyone
also knows about the Nazis attitudes to the disabled. (That reminds me,
who was it who not only argues that motorists should be allowed to
drive at any speed they think fit and said that what he likes about
driving his BMW is 'the sensation of control and mastery' it gives him,
but is also strongly opposed to disabled drivers even being allocated
their own parking spaces. Answers on a postcard!).

Meanwhile amongst the first to be sent to ******'s concentration camps
were vagrants and the 'work-shy' and the Nazis ran high-profile
campaigns against 'dangerous' cyclists with 4,627 cyclists being
'summoned and verbally admonished or temporarily deprived of their
machines' in one week alone in Berlin (December, 1934) for 'crimes'
such as riding 2 abreast or only having one hand on the handlebars.
This was seen as being a farcical state of affairs by many ordinary
Germans with one German magazine in the 1930's even showing a cartoon
of 2 'freulines' looking at a car crash saying 'That will be the fault
of those cyclists again!

I feel strong parallels can be drawn between events such as those above
and what has happened more recently in the UK. For example, there has
been a strong tendency in the UK in recent years to target the 'crimes'
of low status groups, (witness the many high-profile 'clampdown's on
beggars and 'pavement cyclists' and the popularity of 'zero tolerance'
policing) whilst at the same time the crimes of high-status groups are
approached in a an almost apologetic way. (Consider all the rules
surrounding the use of speed cameras and the way the police often say
they don't want to 'alienate' the motoring public by enforcing traffic
law in a robust manner).

I don't know just how far Orwell's prediction that the UK would one day
be dominated by a 'slimy Anglicised form of fascism with cultured
policemen instead of Nazi gorillas' has come to pass. However, perhaps
those who seek to defend inequity and hierarchism in the wider society
and who are also cyclists and find themselves being treated as
third-class citizens might like to ponder on the relationship between
the two.