The Totalitarian Left

When we folk protest carbon taxes here in Australia we are told not to cross against the red light. When those folk protest against a government trying to bring some fiscal sanity into a situation where national bankruptcy is a genuine possibility we get something else. The story in The Daily Mail begins with these dot points:

• Hooded anarchists throw paint and set off flares on Oxford Street
• Police targeted with missiles and light bulbs filled with ammonia
• Windows at The Ritz smashed as masked youths run wild
• Anti-capitalist smash banks and cash points in city centre rampage
• Five police officers injured in clashes, one seriously
• Labour leader Ed Miliband likens protest to anti-apartheid movement

All of this is repulsive, but the last of these is in a league of its own. If this is the kind of analogy that comes to mind, this supposed deep thinker of the left lacks both intellect and decency. For a leader of a major political party to support anarchy in the streets for political advantage is despicable. But if he is right, that there is political advantage in it, then civil society in Britain may be near its end.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

88 Responses to The Totalitarian Left

  1. Rafe says:

    As George Orwell pointed out, you have to be certain kind of (leftwing) intellectual to believe certain things and to put them into action. They are still among us. I don’t know how far our local Greens are prepared to go but that is the place where you find the kind of people who joined the communist parties of yesteryear.

  2. Louis Hissink says:

    Britain is the intellectual home of Communism and Socialism – and it has embraced it in a terminal death dance. It’s probably one reason the Puritans left to go to the Americas. Europe is following Brtiain as well.

  3. Myrddin Seren says:

    ‘Our struggle is to fight to preserve, protect and defend the best of the services we cherish because they represent the best of the country we love,’ said Mr Miliband.

    Tony Abbott stands in front a of bitchin’ sign at an otherwise peaceful rally, and gets flayed.

    Ed Miliband seeks to forment violent revolution in the hope of seizing control of the wreakage, and he’ll probably wind up being given the Nobel Peace Prize.

    The cops in the UK have been utterly emasculated through ‘PC’ ( no pun ) and OH&S nannyism, so the rioters know they can risk nothing worse than a ‘tut tut – oh dear’.

  4. Steve of Ferny Hills says:

    Why must you just focus on the negatives? The London protestors were possibly a bit too passionate, but at least they did not display any sexist signs like the extremists in Canberra.

  5. conrad says:

    I’m not sure that pointing too a bunch of loonies and then saying “left” is very helpful. I could point to a bunch of skinheads and some violence they cause (e.g., soccer games) and then say “right”, but this isn’t very useful either.

  6. Yobbo says:

    Except that of course the people smashing things in London are actually violent socialists, as opposed to “the left” who are non-violent socialists.

    So yeah I guess they are totally different.

  7. daddy dave says:

    The cops in the UK have been utterly emasculated through ‘PC’ ( no pun ) and OH&S nannyism

    Thus proving the power of unchecked bureaucracy. It’s progressive, university educated bureaucrats in government offices that have wrought this.

  8. Peter Patton says:

    conrad

    Did you really just type those two passive aggressive luvvie cliches du jour, “I’m not sure” and “very helpful“? FMD. Dude, grow a pair. You sound like Lefty Kim.

  9. Adrien says:

    I’m not sure that pointing too a bunch of loonies and then saying “left” is very helpful. I could point to a bunch of skinheads and some violence they cause (e.g., soccer games) and then say “right”, but this isn’t very useful either.

    They’re both examples of the ideologies at a violent extreme and therefore indicative tho’ not entirely representative (imho). I think anyone who calls themselves and anarchist and does this sort of thing is a dickhead. Unless the State is corrupt, at war with its people and you are planning to win all you’re doing is provoking the State into authoritarian expansion. Most anarchists I’ve met are just ultra-Purist Trots.

  10. Peter Patton says:

    You’ll probably drop the “inappropriate” line next.

  11. Adrien says:

    So yeah I guess they are totally different.

    There is a difference. Mahatma Ghandi’s a left-wing hero but he wouldn’t do this kind of thing would he? You’re not saying they’re all the same straight-up (tho’ I reckon you believe that) but saying all left-wingers are riot-happy thugs is analogous to calling, say, Jason Soon, a ‘fascist’ because he’s right-wing.

  12. C.L. says:

    Don’t care either way. Britain is finished as a nation, regardless of who’s in power.

  13. Infidel Tiger says:

    Britain is finished as a nation, regardless of who’s in power

    True. It’s long been my opinion that we need to ban immigration from that latrine. They bring too much baggage and fruity ideas from the old country.

  14. JC says:

    IT.

    And how about NZ… Bird alone should be a one man immigration stopper.

  15. C.L. says:

    I read a report yesterday with Cameron raving on about the importance of Earth Hour:

    The Prime Minister recorded a YouTube message supporting Saturday’s Earth Hour, when millions of people are expected to switch off lights for 60 minutes.

    He said: “Sharing responsibility holds the key to fighting climate change.”

    Mr Cameron pledged to make the coalition Britain’s “greenest-ever government” in the fight against climate change.

    But he added: “It will be the choices we make as individuals which will mean the difference between success and failure.

    “That’s what Earth Hour is all about – millions of people all over the world coming together to switch off their lights, tackle climate change and protect our natural world.

    “It is a huge symbol of global solidarity, an inspiring display of international commitment.”

    What a jagoff. I hope his government is destroyed and Labour comes back to finish the civilisational holocaust they started.

  16. JC says:

    I really don’t think most of the Conservative party are like Cameron and are only going along with it because they like the trappings of government.

    However what they don’t realize is that when they start behaving an acting like the other side government isn’t worth holding on to. At some stage the decent side will break through this crap and retake the party.

  17. Adrien says:

    Britain is finished as a nation

    What does that mean for the Monarchy? Switch to the the House of Glücksburg I say.

  18. Infidel Tiger says:

    “That’s what Earth Hour is all about – millions of people all over the world coming together to switch off their lights, tackle climate change and protect our natural world.

    “It is a huge symbol of global solidarity, an inspiring display of international commitment.”

    Chunderous clap trap. Let’s remember that this spiv has never had a real job and has sucked on either a silver spoon or the taxpayers teat since birth.

  19. C.L. says:

    Mark Steyn found himself in the middle of the protest:

    The livelier lads have already rampaged through Fortnum & Mason, the upscale Piccadilly emporium, and attacked the Ritz. Obvious targets, you might say. But I found it more poignant earlier in the day when I went to a favorite coffee place hoping to enjoy a beverage outside on a pleasant spring day as the massed ranks of British layabouts marched by. Instead, the Polish and Balkan baristas were hurriedly dragging in all the sidewalk tables and chairs before the Socialist Workers’ Party chaps showed up in search of projectiles. Nobody in the Socialist Workers’ Party actually works, which is one reason why it’s Mitteleuropeans frothing your coffee rather than any of the natives…

    Judging from the many marchers partial to robotic, pseudo-ethnic West African drumming, the British left’s plan is presumably for the entire country to relaunch itself as the world’s least rhythmic percussion ensemble.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/263159/human-right-suspend-reality-mark-steyn

  20. Adrien says:

    It is a huge symbol of global solidarity, an inspiring display of international commitment

    Given that this a large but universal movement to, um, turn the lights of for an hour, it’s hardly inspiring.

  21. Myrddin Seren says:

    Richard North of EUReferendum dishes it up to the faux-conservatives of the UK with a venom and disdain that is just awesome to behold.

  22. Fred says:

    Why are anarchists protesting against a small decrease in government expenditure?

  23. daddy dave says:

    What does that mean for the Monarchy?

    Given the popularity of William and Harry, is there a non-zero possibility that it will return to monarchic rule if things get really bad?

  24. JC says:

    Why are anarchists protesting against a small decrease in government expenditure

    Because it heading in the wrong direction.

  25. Peter Patton says:

    Adrien

    I’d say that in a very frayed and anxious polity, such as the UK, perhaps a boon for the monarchy will be the result; especially as something in my waters tells me they have recruited a golden girl in Kate Middleton.

  26. JC says:

    Euroref is great. Once he got onto Doc Pach’s crooked shenanigans he didn’t let go until he’d ripped off several kilos of raw meat. He basically turned Doc Pach into a blithering incoherent fruitcake after he was finished with him.

  27. THR says:

    First, these fiscal cuts represent a clear instance of class warfare, and all UK citizens are right to fight them by any means necessary.
    Second, police here and abroad (particularly in the UK) lie habitually about these sorts of protests. All media reports should be taken with a grain of salt.
    Three, please look up the meaning of ‘totalitarian’ before shrilly throwing it about.
    Finally, since one of our resident pearl-clutchers invoked Orwell, let us return to Catalonia:

    I have no particular love for the idealised ‘worker’ as he appears in the bourgeois Communist’s mind, but when I see an actual flesh-and-blood worker in conflict with his natural enemy, the policeman, I do not have to ask myself which side I am on.

  28. daddy dave says:

    when I see an actual flesh-and-blood worker in conflict with his natural enemy, the policeman, I do not have to ask myself which side I am on

    It never hurts to ask yourself questions like “which side am I on.” Reflection is better than reflexiveness.

    First appearances don’t always reveal moral rightness.

  29. JC says:

    First, these fiscal cuts represent a clear instance of class warfare, and all UK citizens are right to fight them by any means necessary.

    So the shop owners have a right to protect their property by any means necessary too?

  30. Infidel Tiger says:

    Are you insane THR? Britain is broke. It’s beyond broke. There’s no fucking money.

    If Cameron wasn’t a useless spiv, he’d be making real cuts and having mass sackings parties.

  31. big dumb fu says:

    Yeah this is class warfare alright. The rent seeker class has plundered all that is left to plunder and are now upset that there is no more to be stolen. They are right to be angry and even justified to act violently. How dare the productive classes run out of money to fund them from the cradle to the grave.

  32. Oh come on says:

    THR obviously got the SWP talking points memo. What a load of bilge.

    The tragedy of this march is that it creates the illusion that Cameron is dishing out the kind of fiscal austerity that will make Britain a viable long-term proposition. Sadly, he isn’t. Not by a long shot. Britain is finished.

  33. This Is Serious Miliband says:

    “For a leader of a major political party to support anarchy in the streets for political advantage is despicable.”

    Make your choice then live your life;
    Come on pal, what are ya?

  34. JC says:

    I don’t believe Britain is done for. The 70’s was worse for Britain in some ways and then Maggie came along.

    There will be another maggie around in the next decade or so.

  35. Adrien says:

    I’d say that in a very frayed and anxious polity, such as the UK, perhaps a boon for the monarchy will be the result; especially as something in my waters tells me they have recruited a golden girl in Kate Middleton.

    What about the Crown Princess o’ Denmark mate. She’s a looka too ‘ey. An’ she had a job once. She ‘Strayan. (ie Not an inbred Eurotrash son of a Nazi-sympathizer.)

  36. Oh come on says:

    Actually, I hope Britain is done for. It’s about time England went its own way and let Scotland, Wales and Ulster enjoy bankruptcy.

  37. C.L. says:

    …when I see an actual flesh-and-blood worker in conflict with his natural enemy, the policeman, I do not have to ask myself which side I am on.

    I actually agree with that.

    In the British example being discussed, however, very few of the protesters are flesh-and-blood workers. Most are either unemployed or (arts) students. Real British workers are watching the whole thing on the tele, cheering for the Old Bill.

  38. Peter Patton says:

    Adrien

    Well given that the Danish monarchy is among the most loved by its people on the planet…

  39. Biota says:

    Humans seem to be collectively bad at anticipating and preventing problems before they occur. When things actually get bad to near terminal then enough people can be convinced that remedial action is needed. I’m with JC, there will be another maggie when she/he is needed.

  40. Adrien says:

    Well given that the Danish monarchy is among the most loved by its people on the planet

    Yeah the House of Glücksburg. I think if you want to sustain monarchy you might consider it. After all the monarch after next will actually be half-Australian. We can switch allegiance to another Hice o’ Lawds cannae we?

    Where’s the Baroque Baron, he’d know. He won’t like it but he’d know.

    (He’ll like it a lot better when Chuck III’s been sittin’ the throne a while.)

  41. Abu Chowdah says:

    First, these fiscal cuts represent a clear instance of class warfare, and all UK citizens are right to fight them by any means necessary.

    Gosh, how stirring. Come on everyone, let’s all storm the barricades over this carbon tax that the middle classes are going to be lumped with here. Class warfare indeed!

  42. Adrien says:

    The trouble with the Middle Class they can’t feature the concept that anyone wants to go to war with ’em.

  43. Michael Fisk says:

    First, these fiscal cuts represent a clear instance of class warfare, and all UK citizens are right to fight them by any means necessary.

    What has destroying property and burning down shops got to do with “opposing cuts”? Are Harrod’s and McDonald’s secretly controlling the British budget or something? Only in the feverish imagination of a knucle-dragging collectivist would there be any justification for attacking random third parties.

    The only connection here is perhaps that the Left’s opposition to fiscal prudence goes along with their murderous hatred of private property.

    I hope any “anarchists” who are found to be destroying property receive a severe beating.

  44. johno says:

    THR – Could you explain what you mean by class and class warfare?

    Marx and Engels never got around to it. They wrote an awful lot about social class and the need to build a classess society, but they never told us what they actually meant by class. The closest they came was in Vol 3 of Das Kapital, which was published after Marx’s death. In a chapter titled ‘The Classes’, Marx declares that the first question to be answered is what constitutes a class. But he doesn’t provide an answer as here the manuscript breaks off.
    Marxist love talking about class warfare, but have any of them ever been able to provide a precise definition of what they mean by socil class and why such violence is justified in the name of class warfare.

  45. THR says:

    THR – Could you explain what you mean by class and class warfare?
    If you want a Marxian definition, the Communist Manifesto is quite clear. A class is a group of people defined by social rank and relation to the means of production. Class warfare refers to the inevitable conflict between antagonistic classes. In this instance, the protests were attended overwhelmingly by unionised workers, who constitute one of the social classes being targeted by Cameron.

  46. dover_beach says:

    Why does being unionised make someone a member of the same class? Aren’t workers within the same profession not members of the same class irrespective of whether they are a member of a union? Or is class simply about this or that group having antagonistic or incommensurable interests?

  47. THR says:

    Aren’t workers within the same profession not members of the same class irrespective of whether they are a member of a union?

    Generally speaking, yes, they are members of the same class.

  48. Peter Patton says:

    If you want a Marxian definition

    If you want a Sydney definition, Marx/ism is bunk.

    I hope this helps.

  49. Michael Fisk says:

    Whether people are members of a particular class is irrelevant to this particular discussion, which is not whether the “cuts” are justified, but whether “the working class” (i.e. state-subsidised layabouts in masks) have the right to burn down the premises of innocent proprietors for no reason (and no, opposing the “cuts” is not a “reason” for committing arson against people who have nothing to do with them).

    THR seems to think it is justified. It is a good thing that all the states founded on his values have either collapsed or now pose no threat to the rest of the world due both to their self-inflicted poverty and total lack of appeal to the working class. Anyone who tries to once again advance these beliefs by using violence should be cut down by the security forces.

  50. Quentin George says:

    The “working class” in these riots are usually pretty toffy – the last riot had the son of a Pink Floyd guitarist joining in the rage.

    Possibly he missed the school trip to the French riviera, I dunno.

  51. Michael Fisk says:

    Speaking of totalitarians, the Cuban goverment’s latest attempt to vilify dissidents has led to a wave of sympathy for the dissidents, not for Communism or the Communist state.

    http://hurryupharry.org/2011/03/26/cuban-regimes-effort-to-vilify-dissidents-backfires/

    It is good to know that another reactionary regime, totally bankrupt, dilapidated, and left-behind-by-history, is soon going to face the judgement of the people – who will undoubtedly legalise property rights across the board after Castro’s anachronistic joke of a government is brought to an end.

  52. Quentin George says:

    But yeah Michael, unlike THR, I don’t think being welfare dependent makes you “working class”.

  53. Infidel Tiger says:

    The only unionised workers at these riots, were the cops getting bashed.

  54. Ev630 says:

    The only unionised workers at these riots, were the cops getting bashed.

    Not in “THR’s World” (TM).

  55. Frank says:

    This guys has a good take on things:

    inspectorgadget.wordpress.com

    The cops in the UK are non plussed at the moment, pay and pension cuts etc led to a lack of rural volunteers to police the London riots. Seems they would be more naturally aligned with the people they are policing in this instance, if not tactically.

    THR, they are unionised and they are being targeted by Cameron, but then they are also a part of the machinery of repression. So that can’t work, simultaneously being screwed by the man while being the man?

  56. Adrien says:

    Could you explain what you mean by class and class warfare?

    Obviously the civil conflicts that obtain when people of fundamentally different socio-economic disposition are at loggerheads and the clash of interest that always underpins it.

    Marx and Engels never got around to it.

    I don’t think is true. But as the borugeoisie had just won a war against the toffs and’d begun a still-going one with the prols I reckon it needed not so much elucidation.

  57. Adrien says:

    borugeoisie

    Sorry should be spelled

    Burgeroisy

  58. Peter Patton says:

    THR

    One social fact you would do well to learn by rote is that THE key message from the NSW election was that it was a NO vote in a referendum on Socialism. Probably not since the Lang era have the forces of international socialism been so prominent in an election campaign, particularly the truly vile performance of that Greens commie c4 in Marrickville, who thankfully has been bitchslapped to the four winds.

  59. Michael Fisk says:

    The forces of hatred and jealousy have been dealt a crushing blow.

  60. THR says:

    The forces of hatred and jealousy have been dealt a crushing blow

    You mean the ALP Right in NSW?

  61. Peter Patton says:

    THR

    The seat of Sydney is held by an Independent, and yet there was a 3% swing AGAINST The commie c4s, and a 15% swing TO the Libs. Dude, you’re an anachronism. Give it up.

  62. Yobbo says:

    THR sure likes to spin a lot of bullshit to justify bored students smashing windows at a McDonalds.

    THR, are they aware that McDonalds is a franchise and therefore a small business? That the person they are hurting by smashing their windows probably makes less money per year than their parents?

    How does that constitute “class warfare”?

  63. THR says:

    And yet three hundred thousand people just protested in London. You’re a dope, patsy.

  64. THR says:

    How does that constitute “class warfare”?

    I never said that tactics were pleasant, or useful. But then, neither are the policies that precipitated the protests.

  65. THR says:

    And, considering the numbers involved, the behaviour of the protesters was remarkably good. This is what a protest ought to look like, by and large. Compare and contrast the pitiful showing earlier this week by the anti-carbon tax oldies, attended by a handful of economic cranks, science cranks, and Hansonite cranks, who together could merge and re-form the League of Rights. (Assuming the latter weren’t also in attendance).

  66. daddy dave says:

    THR, I just don’t understand how you can be on the side of the protestors. The state is going broke. Is that concept something that lefties don’t really believe in? Like, you all roll your eyes and chortle sardonically… like “that old chestnut again.”

    Seriously, they’re out of money. There is such a thing as too much welfare and too much government. The state can’t be the economy.
    That’s a fundamental error.

  67. THR says:

    It’s a question of priorities, dave. Only a couple of years ago, the same ‘broke’ state implemented a suite of No Banker Left Behind policies. Now it wants to cut the meagre entitlements of ordinary people.

  68. daddy dave says:

    I should add, regardless of your point of view on tax rates, that raising taxes won’t work. It won’t save them, for a variety of reasons.

  69. daddy dave says:

    well, yeah, bailouts didn’t help I agree. But they may have been wrongheaded but the intention of the bailouts was not to save bankers’ jobs.

  70. dover_beach says:

    Tax the rich, as one of the graffitists wrote.

  71. dover_beach says:

    Hey the ‘No Banker Left Behind policies’ were warmly supported by the broad Left. Apparently they felt the stock of capital or borrowings available to the British State were inexhaustible. Welcome to reality, comrades.

  72. Peter Patton says:

    THR

    Hullo? Demonstrations by leftists ALWAYS mean shit. These people spend their lives looking for any opportunity to exploit. But when it comes to the mass turn-outs that matter – Thursday night shopping, AFL grand-finals, and elections – we find that support for that demonstration was maxed on the day of the demonstration. 300,000 is a fart in the bath in the UK.

  73. Peter Patton says:

    This is why Marxists have been reduced to getting on their knees for Islamists.

  74. viva says:

    So now the Brits are behaving like Greeks. Recently I expressed surprise that Americans in Wisconsin were behaving like Greeks over state measures to cut costs. In reply a US rancher supplied an agricultural explanation:

    “One of the hardest things we have to do to any animal on this farm is weaning….you take that teat away and those animals go nuts, kicking and throwing a fit (sometimes for days). It’s a hard job but it has to be done.”

  75. Yobbo says:

    This is what a protest ought to look like, by and large. Compare and contrast the pitiful showing earlier this week by the anti-carbon tax oldies

    Shorter THR: Smashing windows and destroying property is the whole point of protest. If you just sit around and calmly chant slogans you are missing the point.

  76. Peter Patton says:

    THR

    It is curious that you give more credence to a demo than an election held days later. 😉

  77. MarkL of Canberra says:

    Bit too busy to join the fun. And in any case, I don’t think you folks have left any part of HRT’s communist drivel unfisked (not that I bothered to read what it wrote – the usual archaic, long-discredited communist claptrap, by the responses).

    I found coverage of the welfare-state rally in the UK saddening. So many entitled bludgers and extremely violent leftards. And Milband, whose party brought them all to this pass, desperately trying to be Benito Mussolini.

    A century ago these people were the world’s sole superpower and the bestrode the world like a colossus. Now they are reduced to whining like whipped curs for other people’s money in welfare-state handouts. But the money’s gone and it’s not coming back, the welfare state is bankrupt after having ruined the economy, the socialists finally have run out of other people’s money to steal.

    And now the reckoning starts. For this is just the start. It gets much, much worse from now onwards.

    MarkL
    Brisbane

  78. THR says:

    But the money’s gone and it’s not coming back, the welfare state is bankrupt after having ruined the economy, the socialists finally have run out of other people’s money to steal.

    More incoherent gibberish. So the ‘welfare state’ triggered the GFC, did it? You’re too stupid to comment here.

  79. THR says:

    It is curious that you give more credence to a demo than an election held days later

    Patsy, if you think the NSW election was a ‘referendum on communism’, you perhaps ought to have a lie down.

  80. StKilda says:

    About 10 million people live in and around London. THR seems to think 300,000 is a majority. Maybe thats why Trots have never won an election?

  81. Pingback: THE WORLD IS BLEEDING « STILL CHAOS

  82. johno says:

    THR – You defined class as ‘a group of people defined by social rank and relation to the means of production’ and class warfare as ‘the inevitable conflict between antagonistic classes’. This doesn’t really expalin what you mean by social class, class warfare or why you consider the violence is justified.

    As I see it, under a market system, workers and owners have different relations to the means of production, but their interests are in harmony. Workers want their employer to succeed to give them greater job security and the more successful the owner, the better the wages and conditions the owner can offer to retain their workers.

    Unionised and non-unionised workers’ interests are obviously in conflict, with unionised workers using violence against non-unionised workers to prevent them from offering their labour at a lower rate than the unionised workers. This could justify using violence against union picket lines that are denying non-unionised labour the right to work.

    The conflicting interests between government workers and their employers, the government, is a bit more complicated. As a government worker they have an interest in higher wages, but as a taxpayer, they have an interest in lower taxes. As they generally gain more from higher wages than they lose from higher taxes, on balance government workers prefer higher wages to lower taxes.

    As wages make up 60-80% of government spending, government only wish to pay enough to attract the workers in needs so they can keep down taxes.

    In a country like England, these conflicts should be sorted out through the democratic process. Once again, how do you justify the violence?

  83. . says:

    More incoherent gibberish. So the ‘welfare state’ triggered the GFC, did it? You’re too stupid to comment here.

    ???

    What about the FHA PMI guarantee? What about the HUD directives to increase what essentially was unaffordable mortgages?

  84. THR says:

    This doesn’t really expalin what you mean by social class, class warfare or why you consider the violence is justified.

    I never said violence per se was justified. As for class warfare – if classes (as defined above) are antagonistic, then it follows that the conflicts between them can be characterised as ‘class warfare’. Examples include protests like the ones above or, to choose a local example, the introduction of Workchoices by the Coalition.

    As I see it, under a market system, workers and owners have different relations to the means of production, but their interests are in harmony.

    So you say. In reality, employers steal billions in unpaid overtime from workers, and it’s a commonplace in Australia to regard one’s boss as a fuckwit.

    Unionised and non-unionised workers’ interests are obviously in conflict, with unionised workers using violence against non-unionised workers to prevent them from offering their labour at a lower rate than the unionised workers.

    Actually, their ‘interests’ are virtually never in conflict. Both want better pay and conditions. To the extent that conflict exists at all, it’s about how to achieve better pay and conditions.

    In a country like England, these conflicts should be sorted out through the democratic process.

    Well, we might have some different ideas about what constitutes ‘democratic process’. In any event, the protests were democratic, even by the emaciated standards of the UK. A handful of protesters damaged property; hundreds of thousands didn’t.

  85. THR says:

    What about the FHA PMI guarantee? What about the HUD directives to increase what essentially was unaffordable mortgages?

    I used to think you were reasonable, dot, but it seems you’ve traded your brain for ideological blinkers. Tell us a few more sob stories about poor bankes forced by Obama, at gunpoint, to make loans and securitise them for massive profit.

  86. daddy dave says:

    if classes (as defined above) are antagonistic

    But they’re not. At least, not necessarily. I’m concerned by the anti-rich rhetoric in the London protests. The fact is that the rich are often a scapegoat for populist anger, like, well… bankers, unions, Jews, ‘shock jocks’, whoever. Sometimes their hoarded wealth expands in the minds of the mob to become a vast pile of gold coins that can be easily plundered and used to feed the masses.

    This kind of delirium has destroyed entire nations.

  87. . says:

    I used to think you were reasonable, dot, but it seems you’ve traded your brain for ideological blinkers. Tell us a few more sob stories about poor bankes forced by Obama, at gunpoint, to make loans and securitise them for massive profit.

    You don’t even know what you’re talking about THR.

    Obama has squat to do with it other than he hasn’t repealed it (nor did Bush or Clinton). The US Federal Government would underwrite PMI on any mortgage without any risk aversion and had the taxpayer subsidise losses. You don’t think this was a stupid idea?

    It is the lynchpin of the whole stinking US mortgage industry which will invariably fail again.

  88. THR says:

    The lynchpin is that sub-prime mortgages were extremely profitable, and any government activities were a mere sideshow. Why not look at the obvious incentives to lend, rather than blame ‘socialism’ for the GFC?

Comments are closed.