London Is Burning Thanks To Washington

Let me make something perfectly clear I am not locked into a conversation of capitalism versus socialism, That is not what I understand the choices of my world to be. I am having a conversation about the insurrection in England whether it came from Washington; and so we are examining the possible causes of the rage in the children of England. Since England is not and never was to my knowledge a socialist state,and its economy has been central to the development of modern capitalism, the issue cannot be one of socialism. Let me therefore reiterate my points; the capitalism of Britain , The United States and other European states is built on the theft of land and labour from many of the worlds peoples, as well as the exploitation it own people. Britain benefited extensively from the profits made on the Atlantic Slave Trade, the ports of London , Liverpool and Bristol grew and developed as a result of the slave trade,[ as we say today it is not personal it was business and profits].SLAVE LABOUR IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN BRITISH COLONIES CREATED CAPITAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAPITALISM. At this time there is no issue of Socialism it simply does not arise. In simple language Capitalism is a predatory system by its very nature. It concentrates wealth in the hands of a few, starting with military power and using it to steal land and labour from other peoples creating an empire upon which the sun never set. It has resulted in the stealing of land from millions of people and the destruction of their way of life. These lands were stolen and people subdued in The United States, Canada, all of Latin America the Caribbean, Australia, New Zealand AND THE LIST GOES ON. This economic system runs the world including China and so-called socialist countries who mostly have to function in a Capitalist world market. My contention is that the system is predatory by its very nature and has not worked for the vast majority of the worlds peoples. Let us look at the statistics of wealth distribution ,deprivation and want on this planet. UNICEF statistics indicate that every day 22,000 children die as a result of poverty. The UNDP [The United Nation Development Program] statistics in 1998 indicated that the worlds 225 richest people had a combined wealth of one trillion dollars which equalled the combined annual income of the poorest 2.5 billion people. Today the wealth of the 3 wealthiest individuals on the planet exceeds the combined GDP of the 48 least developed countries. The Helsinki based World Institute of Development Economic Research of the U.N. University statistics indicates that the richest 10% of adults in the world own 85% of global assets while one half of the earth's adult population, one billion people, own barely 1% of global wealth. The United States Federal Reserve found that the wealth of the wealthiest one percent[ 1%] of Americans is greater than the total wealth of the bottom 95%. These are just some of the statistics that indicate a world of bizarre inequalities that make our world dysfunctional . This situation is not accidental it is a direct result of the theft of land and labour to benefit a few over the last 400 years and more. These facts have nothing to do with socialism ,it is about how capital was accumulated by capitalism. It was accumulated by predators who swam in the blood of millions of people murdered and maimed along the way, not to mention people losing their land and their communities in the process. I contend tat contemporary Capitalism in England and the United States has bred a permanent under class that are mostly meant for the prison system. The United States have privatized prison giving investors a vested interest in putting people in jail. They now provide free slave labour to private capitalists. Thankfully Britain has not followed suit. It was this young underclass in Britain that revolted. The financial capitalists gambled and created mayhem and it is the ordinary people who are told they must suffer cuts as a result of the greed of a few. It is the programs of the poor that must be cut. Representative Democracy is distorted by the toxic influence of the capitalist elite who fund the election campaigns. CAPITALISTS MOSTLY DO NOT GIVE MONEY TO POLITICIANS WITHOUT A QUID PRO QUO. THERE MUST ALWAYS BE PROFITS FROM EVERY DOLLAR YOU INVEST, WHETHER IN STOCKS, BUSINESS OR POLITICIANS. This economic system does not work in the best interest of the vast majority of human beings living on this planet.The quality of life of human beings is not a serious concern in this predatory system. Human being are only heard when they scream and raise hell as the children did in England, and even then the first thought is punishment not amelioration. NO AMOUNT OF RANTING AND FEAR SCAREMONGERING ABOUT SOCIALISM OR ANY THING ELSE, WILL ALTER THE FACT THAT CAPITALISM HAS NOT WORKED AND IS NOT WORKING FOR THE MAJORITY OF HUMAN BEINGS LIVING ON EARTH. They often try to confuse us by the assumption that freedom of speech and other rights like freedom of movement and freedom of choice is a product of the economic system of capitalism. Man soul and spirit throughout the ages has yearned for choices and the existence of these rights do not in anyway depend upon an economic system of predatory greed and exploitation. Capitalism can tolerate any form of government that allows its greed to grow, from Hitler's Germany whose economic system was capitalist to Communist China whose economic system is largely capitalist with its foreign investors, buying of bonds AND total engagement in the world capitalist trading system. This system is anti-human and does not work to improve the quality of life of the vast majority of mankind. IT DOES NOT HOWEVER FOLLOW THAT I HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE EXCEPTING A SYSTEM CALLED SOCIALISM. LABELS DO NOT HELP US TO COME TO GRIPS WITH THE REAL ISSUES OF HUMAN EXISTENCE. I do not accept the postulation that all human beings are corrupt, that belies my experience. I have seen the example of Nelson Mandela , a leader extending forgiveness to those who imprisoned him for most of his adult life and murdered thousands of his people besides. I know of Gandhi's teachings and sacrifice as well as the life and teachings of M.L. King. These were and are examples of a higher human state. So too the example of Mother Theresa and there are many other humble people who are engaged in serving and assisting others. We can alter our world without the labels that sometimes block our way. My statement that the youth are acting out their reality is not a statement of approval it is rather a statement of fact. This fact merely indicates what is. The angry children are not seeking our approval mine or yours they are acting out their rage. THE CONCEPT OF SEIZE WHAT YOU WANT WAS NOT CREATED BY HITLER THE FASCISTS OR BLACK PANTHERS.[I note the incongruity of putting the leader of the most organised white racist movement of the twentieth century, Hitler, in the same line as The Black Panthers to illustrate a point ha ha] 'SEIZE WHAT YOU WANT' IT IS A WELL PRACTISED AND PROFIT CREATING CAPITALIST CONCEPT USED BY MANY OVER THE YEARS TO BECOME RICH AND PROFITABLE..seize what you want and didn't they!! . They seized slaves from West Africa, they seized land from The Native American people and the aborigines in Australia and the Maori in New Zealand and Africans in Southern Africa AND ON AND ON AND ON. To those who choose to look, you cannot sell this system as one in the best interest of humankind. It represents our worse selves our lower and limited understanding. When we choose again we will choose something more harmonious ,more loving and more just. I DO NOT ACCEPT THAT HUMANS ARE CORRUPT ,WE CAN BE THAT, BUT WE ARE ALSO LOVING, FORGIVING AND CAPABLE OF LAYING DOWN OUR LIVES FOR OTHERS. THIS IS THE HUMAN BEING OF THE FUTURE. IT IS ALWAYS OUR CHOICE.

Meleagar wrote,


“You're the embodiment of that which you claim to be fighting against - might makes right. You cannot validate your will-to-power without validating the will-to-power right of those you riot against.”


I find that much in what you write Meleagar to belong to the troubled sphere of either/or reasoning. There doesn’t appear to be a great deal of nuance in your responses. Perhaps that is the consequence of your position? Here nor there, is this what the youth of London (and elsewhere) are doing? I think Jiddy20’s reply, which I think speaks quite well all its own, reveals that this doesn’t have to be viewed as an issue of might makes right! Rather, it can be rightly viewed as the absence of might! After all, it wasn’t those in power (and on vacation) that lost anything or was there any real chance of them losing power! Anger, frustration, and a sense of hopelessness in the face of an uncertain future are the likely causes, not revolution. Therefore, this wouldn’t be a case of might makes right as it would be one of protest against those who possess the might and have used it to their benefit! They were, at core, protesting a loss of power that was theirs, i.e., wanting to get back what was taken, not GAIN wealth through an exercise of power. This is not to justify violence or what have you. This only recognizes the likelier cause of their discontent. If you want an example of might makes right in the sense of seizure of power through might, then you might wish to consider the Revolutionary War as an arguable example.

Jiddy20 has made the argument that capitalist systems and societies have used their power to advance on those who’ve had no power! The only way the underclass can attempt to gain power in such a system is either have a working government that frames policies in their favor in ways rational or protest against those government and financial interests that would have it otherwise! Such peoples have no other real option. I know that Ayn Randian phrases SOUND good-but as is the case with much of this sort of rhetoric, it misses the reality and pathetic routine of those who must live by the dictates of an economic system that neither cares nor carries the burden of those chains that it has placed on the feet of those it has profited from!

Eric D.

Meleagar, have you not learned anything? One cannot reason with Liberals. They are too much in awe of their 'progressive' professors' rhetoric to think clearly. After school, they carry this tradition to others who will accept them, and only show respect to those who agree. If one doesn't agree, then one is crazy or ignorant. Long live 'ignorance'! We are crazy in even trying to impart wisdom to such close-minded fools, who tout open-mindedness and empathy. What cruelty Liberals have put upon the human race under the guise of compassion and 'social justice'.

Mr j wrote,


“Meleagar, have you not learned anything? One cannot reason with Liberals. They are too much in awe of their 'progressive' professors' rhetoric to think clearly.”


Especially when liberals present credible evidence and reasoning that stand regardless of where they may have received their training and education. You’re right! Arguing with logic and facts is impossible for many conservatives to do!


Mr j wrote,


“After school, they carry this tradition to others who will accept them, and only show respect to those who agree.”


You know this is wide spread rhetorical corruption of biased evil-liberals-based on what? Your opinion? No conservative movements are like this? What of Christian conservative movements that have actively tried to marginalize gays, women’s rights to choose, and demonize atheists as being un-American? It is odd that you would say that we’re unsympathetic, disrespectful, and alienating of others while you’re encouraging ALL three behaviors in this very statement.


Mr j wrote,


“If one doesn't agree, then one is crazy or ignorant.”


Depends! One may not be crazy or ignorant in as much as simply taking on views that lead to questionable conclusions, like ‘capitalism works well for everyone wherever it has been applied.’ This may not be an ignorant statement-so to speak-just one contingent on highly questionable economic and historical interpretations. Arguments have been put forward. If we’re THAT wrong, show us!


Mr j wrote,


“Long live 'ignorance'! We are crazy in even trying to impart wisdom to such close-minded fools, who tout open-mindedness and empathy. What cruelty Liberals have put upon the human race under the guise of compassion and 'social justice'.”


You’re right, only liberals are insulting and arrogant fools that are close minded to the wisdom of conservative orthodoxy! You appear to illustrate your own contradictions without one more written syllable from me.


Eric D.

thankfully, I don't have to worry about contradicting myself when speaking with Liberals; again, no reasonig with them. I, a conservative (I won't speak for all the conservatives), am an individual who believes in personal responsibility and individualism. I don't promote what is cruel for all by convincing or forcing all that it is for their own good. Let's all cut down the tallest trees so that the smaller can get some sun

Mr j wrote,


“thankfully, I don't have to worry about contradicting myself when speaking with Liberals; again, no reasonig with them.”


Hmmm….you make an enticing assertion Mr j. Please keep writing!


Mr j wrote,


“I, a conservative (I won't speak for all the conservatives), am an individual who believes in personal responsibility and individualism.”


Really? Individualism? Responsibility you say (or write). Yes, I wish we liberals weren’t such commies! Really? Conservatives like William F. Buckley was for freedom and liberty? Did you ever read what many of your conservative teachers and advocates have advocated for in the past? Were conservatives for the Civil Rights Acts? The rights of women to vote or for gays to marry and live their lives as they deem fit?


Mr j wrote,


“I don't promote what is cruel for all by convincing or forcing all that it is for their own good. Let's all cut down the tallest trees so that the smaller can get some sun”


Yes, cruel! It is cruel to stand for those who have not nor had little opportunity for success due to the arbitrary circumstance of history! It is cruel to stand up for democracy in the face of those business institutions that only wish to circumvent such processes and for which you advocate. Evil cruelty, indeed, to advocate for labor wealth-value that is taken from them due to property law and policy restrictions that limits freedom and the pursuit of happiness for all. How evil we have been to have dared help create the greatest middle class system that this country, and most others, have ever known!

Eric D.

Meleagar, have you not learned anything? One cannot reason with Liberals. They are too much in awe of their 'progressive' professors' rhetoric to think clearly.

I agree one cannot reason with most liberals, but what I write here isn't about changing their perspective, but exposing it for those who are not yet subsumed by the programming.

If one doesn't agree, then one is crazy or ignorant. Long live 'ignorance'! We are crazy in even trying to impart wisdom to such close-minded fools, who tout open-mindedness and empathy. What cruelty Liberals have put upon the human race under the guise of compassion and 'social justice'.

The same kinds of cruelty that led to the "social justice" campaigns and policies of Woodrow Wilson, Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Mao and Josef Stalin.

I think that more and more people are waking up to the "framing" issue, where the media and academia have worked hand-in-hand to frame debate entirely on the left-wing side of the spectrum, where "compromise" is between left-wingers painted as right wing, and left-wingers painted as moderates. The true rignt-wing of the political spectrum - individualistic libertarianism - has been framed entirely out of the political and social debate.

The true right-wing is about less government, and more individual rights; less federal government, more state rights, and austere financial responsibility. The right wing would never advocate for corporatism, which is a form of socialism, or syndicalism, because those are forms of government that solidify power into the state and strip it from the individual.

Any form of governmental fascism, where the state basically commands conformity of the populace to an agenda and takes over or weds itself to the media and corporations, is necessarily left-wing. When left-wingers claim that Nazi germany or fascist Italy were right wing, they mean that from the perspective where the actual right wing has been framed out of the debate. Fascism and Corporatism might be to the right of idealistic communism, but they are still entirely within the left side of the spectrum.

Of course, leftists will never admit that, because then they lose their Orwellian power to frame the debate in terms of "heads I win, tails you lose".

But, I think, more and more people are starting to realize what's been going on for the past 50 or so years, and thus we have the Tea Party revolution.

Meleagar wrote,


“I agree one cannot reason with most liberals, but what I write here isn't about changing their perspective, but exposing it for those who are not yet subsumed by the programming.”


It hasn’t been too convincing, to be honest!


Meleagar wrote,


“The same kinds of cruelty that led to the "social justice" campaigns and policies of Woodrow Wilson, Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Mao and Josef Stalin.”


Yes, Hitler, Mussolini. Moa, and Stalin’s campaigns were equivalent to that of Martin Luther King Jr., Mother Teresa’s, the labor and gay rights movements, or the hippy revolution of the 1960’s. Hardly! Interesting that Wilson, by the way, and I’m not getting this from a Left wing ideologue, opposed certain social justice movements of his day, like women’s right to vote! He, and congress, eventually capitulated due to the war in Europe. He must have been a bad social justice advocate lol!


Meleagar wrote,


“I think that more and more people are waking up to the "framing" issue, where the media and academia have worked hand-in-hand to frame debate entirely on the left-wing side of the spectrum, where "compromise" is between left-wingers painted as right wing, and left-wingers painted as moderates. The true rignt-wing of the political spectrum - individualistic libertarianism - has been framed entirely out of the political and social debate.”


This is the problem with ideologues: if the majority of what is being reported or what has been gathered by experts from around the globe does not match up with the right-wing interpretation of the world, then it must be a conspiracy that has fooled our best minds. Nonsense! Not everything in academia or the media will fit in either a left or right wing category! Where such information doesn’t match up to the constructed narrative that movement conservatives have spent five decades attempting to construct, it may be because truth (as Colbert put it) has a liberal bias, and not because scores of independent thinking intellectuals in the media and in academia simply hate conservatives and have been attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of all the people. There’s simply no evidence of anything like what you wrote. It is a pure perception.


Meleagar wrote,


“The true right-wing is about less government, and more individual rights; less federal government, more state rights, and austere financial responsibility. The right wing would never advocate for corporatism, which is a form of socialism, or syndicalism, because those are forms of government that solidify power into the state and strip it from the individual.”


How many are you? Do you all meet in a small room with a capacity of about fifty? Just kidding! There’s no such thing as ‘true right wing’ in the way that you’ve described it historically or otherwise. Both groups (left and right) can fit what you’ve described here and elsewhere depending on what the issue is. Since there’s never been a right wing movement in power that you’ve described, by the way, we have no empirical evidence of how well your system would even work! I suppose, also, that we’re to forgo any consideration on how the market system is governed by law and policy and that it too can restrict people’s pursuit of happiness because such pro-business-free market thinking is an example of individualism and so on? Really?


Meleagar wrote,


“Any form of governmental fascism, where the state basically commands conformity of the populace to an agenda and takes over or weds itself to the media and corporations, is necessarily left-wing.”


No evidence for this whatsoever!


Meleagar wrote,


“Of course, leftists will never admit that, because then they lose their Orwellian power to frame the debate in terms of "heads I win, tails you lose".”


Or we won’t admit such weird interpretations because there is no cogent reason to accept it.



Meleagar wrote,


“But, I think, more and more people are starting to realize what's been going on for the past 50 or so years, and thus we have the Tea Party revolution.”


Yes, a party formed on the ill-informed bases that the founders were against taxes-or high taxes and individual freedom. Again, historical revisionism of the highest sort!


Eric D.

You are mistaking the right to do something with the physical capacity to do that thing. Rights are unalienable; the capacity to do those things can be abridged by physical circumstances and governments.

As I said: rights are not unalienable in any literal sense. The right to do something requires ACTION – the capacity to carry out that right without restraints. To say that people have an unalienable right to do something when they do not have the physical capacity to do that thing is meaningless. It would make no sense to claim that Jews living in Auschwitz had “unalienable rights” when they were being herded into the gas chambers.

Real rights – rights with teeth – require force. They require government to protect and defend them. This is a point that you cannot dispute by appealing to imaginary rights.

Is there any difference between increasing ones wealth and protecting one's wealth? Increasing how much land one owns, and protecting how much land one owns?

You're dodging. If a person is living in a state of total slavery, then they arguably have no rights. Let's say the government liberates that slave and gives them:

- Autonomy of their own body
- Freedom of speech
- Freedom of religion
- Freedom to work at a place of their choice and keep their wealth
- Freedom to marry who they want
- Representation in government
- Freedom to own property
- A right to privacy

Then by any definition, the government has "increased" this person's liberty because they have the ability to do more things than they could when they were enslaved. This is something you cannot dispute.

The nature of the world is that we must work to survive, whether it is avoiding predators and killing animals for food and skins, or collecting berries, we are "forced" by the nature of existence to work.

This is a straw man – I’m not disputing the inevitability of work. I am disputing the exploitative nature of work that is inherent in a capitalist society. Capitalism exploits workers in four crucial ways:

•It alienates workers from the product they produce.
•The labor becomes impersonal and controlled.
•It alienates workers from their basic human need to be imaginative and creative through their work.
•It alienates workers from other human beings.

Unless someone puts a gun to their head, they are no more "forced" to do anything than all sentient life forms are forced to do something or live in privation.

You’re ignoring the fact that there are two types of force: physical and symbolic. The most common form of social control is not through direct physical violence (e.g. a gun to the head) but rather through subtler means such as internalization of norms and values, shunning, shaming, ostracism, discriminatory treatment, rewards and punishments, etc. Capitalism exerts force over people without having to resort to violence.

Unlike dictators, business owners cannot command how you live your life;

They command how you live in a number of ways:

- Size of your paycheck determines where you can live, what food you can buy, how nice of a home you can have, what types of comforts you can afford, etc.

- Benefits determines whether you can afford to see a doctor, whether you can take vacations, whether you can afford to have kids, etc.

- How you dress, what you can say and do, your demeanor, the emotions you visibly express, your opinions, and even the unique manner in which you perform job tasks are all controlled by your boss.

- You cannot vote on company policy, on your pay, on who your supervisor is, on what hours you work, etc.

The were all left-wing - big government, socialistic policies, anti-capitalist, anti-individualistic, anti-libertarian.

You just equated six distinct ideologies as if they were the same thing. You are a text-book example of someone who is incapable of seeing ambiguity. Either that or you just failed political science 1101 in college.

The same kinds of cruelty that led to the "social justice" campaigns and policies of Woodrow Wilson, Adolph Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Mao and Josef Stalin.

This is a fallacy called “observational selection.” You’re counting the hits and ignoring the misses. Social justice campaigns led to the abolition of slavery, serfdom, feudalism, theocracy, pogroms, torture, censorship of the press, and child labor. Social justice campaigns helped secure women’s suffrage, the Civil Rights Act, sexual liberation, gay and lesbian rights, an end to institutionalized racism, the 40 hour week with overtime pay and benefits, worker safety laws, head start, meals on wheels, environmental protection, and safer automobiles.

Why do you conveniently forget to mention that?

Any form of governmental fascism, where the state basically commands conformity of the populace to an agenda and takes over or weds itself to the media and corporations, is necessarily left-wing.

Then how do you explain socialism, which is opposed to the very existence corporations? How about communism, which is a classless, stateless society with no government? Or how about anarchism, which is against corporations AND the state? Or how about libertarian socialism, democratic socialism, anarcho-syndicalism, and participatory economics? Every single one of these left-wing ideologies are anti-government.

Once again, I didn't say that all laws are wrong; I didn't say that the erosion of some liberties in order to have such protections was a bad thing. I said such laws necessariy reduce liberty.

Theoretical models are not how the world actually works. Left-wing governments and social restructurings virtually always turn into fascist states - italy, germany, soviet union, cuba, china, viet nam, cambodia, etc., because people are corrupt whether in business or government, an the more money and power the government has, the more corrupt it becomes, which is why government should have as little money and power as possible.

But how does a good government function without money?

Also, I feel like you are arguing that the left is sinister, sounds a bit outdated for my tastes.

Everyone wants productivity, people need a left and right as they do their own feet. However delineation stands, there should be effective policies(not necessarily 'governmental,' though governmental in the true sense) that both keep humanity in a state of protective conservation and a prospective "moving forward".

What real issue is being solved by saying left-wing thought only accomplishes a specific goal, while right-wing philosophy oddly does the same thing? Please do not only address this question.

Jonrich you do an excellent job.So I say here! here!

I wholly second Jiddy20's cheer: here here! Much of what has been written by the other side of the debate does reveal a sort of binary-moralistic manner of thinking: the world is divided up into bite-sized spheres of capitalism and liberalism, and there's no in between, no nuance, and no other way the world can be. In such cognitive circumstances there's little room for a contrary viewpoint. The appeal must be towards unseen and immutable principles that the faithful adhere to- rather than admitting to the gritty realities of a complex-and often uncertain- world that we all happen to occupy!

Eric D.

Gee Edelker you do like those labels don't you so easy to hide behind. 'Binary moralistic' ? World divided in bite size bits of capitalism? Open your eyes capitalist principles have swallowed the world whole, hence the excruciating pain of millions of working people all over the world that now follows the last grand larceny that has left millions without homes or jobs or hope. Note well that the Wall Street gangsters HAVE NOT MISSED A BEAT OR LOST A DOLLAR, they continue their speculation and exploitation undeterred. You go on in your wisdom to speak of an uncertain world, we know the world is uncertain. This uncertainty is guaranteed by the greedy grasping gangsters who control the capitalist system and who continue to believe that after centuries of theft' murder and pillage they are still entitled to take whatever they want at the expense of the peopled of this plane

Jiddy20 wrote,

“Gee Edelker you do like those labels don't you so easy to hide behind. 'Binary moralistic' ? World divided in bite size bits of capitalism? Open your eyes capitalist principles have swallowed the world whole, hence the excruciating pain of millions of working people all over the world that now follows the last grand larceny that has left millions without homes or jobs or hope. Note well that the Wall Street gangsters HAVE NOT MISSED A BEAT OR LOST A DOLLAR, they continue their speculation and exploitation undeterred. You go on in your wisdom to speak of an uncertain world, we know the world is uncertain. This uncertainty is guaranteed by the greedy grasping gangsters who control the capitalist system and who continue to believe that after centuries of theft' murder and pillage they are still entitled to take whatever they want at the expense of the peopled of this plane”


Woe woe there!!! Did you at all read my previous post?? I fully agree with you. I was saying that I see the praiseworthiness of Jonrich111’s rebuttal to Meleagar’s. I’m fully in agreement with you and Jonrich111! I was describing the more conservative-libertarian-and pro-capitalist mindset as I see it! Re-read carefully lol! Wow!


Eric D.

SORRY! VERY SORRY EDELKER! .. My comments were meant for Meleager. I AM AD DIEM with you and Jonrich. So sorry my brother. ONE LOVE. [BOB MARLEY STYLE]