Ban on under 21s buying alcohol

[DownwardDog]

I like this thread...

It should be renamed Socialism and its Relationship to High Street Litter.

Or, Will We Still Have Litter in a Socialist Society?

If past discussions on U75 are to be any guide then I think we're all going to be too busy going to soviets and cleaning toilets to pick up litter.

 

[poster342002]

This scheme is stupid and unworkable. It's voluntary, as 18-21 year olds are legally allowed to buy booze, they would have to introduce a new law to stop it. If it's voluntary there are always gonna be off-licences who will continue to serve them. Even if all the shops in Croydon adhered to the scheme then the youngsters will just go to the neighbouring borough to get their drink.

Some retailers have introduced this already. In the Co-op you have to be over 21 to buy booze.

What will happen is that particiaption the "voluntary" scheme will end up being a condition of the shop's license. Young drinkers won't be able to get booze anywhere in London once this scheme ends up being imposed by all the boroughs.

 

[poster342002]

Fundamentally, we are conditioned to see litter as bad, BAD - for no real reason other than that its there, and doesn't represent the stern, self-controlled and orderly mentality prized so highly by our overlords and ancestors.

Or because it's dirty, attracts rodents and diseases, stinks, is unsanitary and makes the quality of life worse for those who have to live amongst it.

I'd love to see what you say to working class people campaigning for their area to be cleaned up. "But comrade, you don't understand - litter and grubbiness is good for you and helps release your creativity" or some such bollocks?

 

[kyser_soze]

Fundamentally, we are conditioned to see litter as bad, BAD - for no real reason other than that its there, and doesn't represent the stern, self-controlled and orderly mentality prized so highly by our overlords and ancestors. Moaning about how people drop litter in cities is, in actual fact, no different in its philosophical outlook from bemoaning the fact the working-classes don't still spend 4 hours a day scrubbing at their doorstone and bleaching everything in the house.

Fundamentally we're conditioned to disregard our feacal matter because living in your own shit is bad or you in both health and psyhological terms. Leaving rubbish everywhere is akin to shitting all over the place. Fuck all to do with overlording.

 

[In Bloom]

18 year olds can have sex, vote, drive, join the army etc. Why shouldn't they be allowed to buy drink?

In case they decide to do all five in the same night

 

[In Bloom]

I think that demanding people have a Socialist sense of social responsibility without being given access to any of the benefits of living in a Socialist society is unfair, moralistic and twattish.

I'm not "demanding" that anybody do anything, I'm just saying that people are responsible for the consequences of their own actions, whether or not their actions are a part of a wider social problem.

 

[kyser_soze]

In case they decide to do all five in the same night

You forgot getting a tatoo....

 

[Das Uberdog]

Or because it's dirty, attracts rodents and diseases and makes the quality of life worse for those who have to live amongst it.

Dirty, dirty, dirty! The stern Victorian value in a clean home lead to such sterile home environments that modern children today actually have undeveloped immune systems through a lack of exposure to bacteria! The point about the old value in sterilising ones environment was that it fell very neatly into the then popular modernist narrative - that the sterilisation of our environment was actually a sign that humans were further removing themselves from barbarism and becoming more 'civilised'.

Infact it was nothing of the sort; it was a perfect case of supply creating demand, false demand about the myth of hygiene. Almost all sanitary products create themselves a false market through false propaganda about the severe health risks of not constantly cleansing yourself or your environment in some form or another.

Fact: your chopping board harbours 50 times more bacteria than your toilet seat.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/oct/24/advertising.asa

Don't fall for the lies. A few rats about here and there and a bit of grime never did no-one no harm. Don't be so bourgeois.

 

[poster342002]

Dirty, dirty, dirty! The stern Victorian value in a clean home lead to such sterile home environments that modern children today actually have undeveloped immune systems through a lack of exposure to bacteria! The point about the old value in sterilising ones environment was that it fell very neatly into the then popular modernist narrative - that the sterilisation of our environment was actually a sign that humans were further removing themselves from barbarism and becoming more 'civilised'.

Infact it was nothing of the sort; it was a perfect case of supply creating demand, false demand about the myth of hygiene. Almost all sanitary products create themselves a false market through false propaganda about the severe health risks of not constantly cleansing yourself or your environment in some form or another.





Don't fall for the lies. A few rats about here and there and a bit of grime never did no-one no harm. Don't be so bourgeois.

You are taking the fucking piss with all that, aren't you?

"no to hygeine! No to pest-control! We want rat-infested homes - NOW!"

 

[Das Uberdog]

There are reasons you don't want rats in your house apart from the hygiene implications - the fuckers will bite your eyes out given half the chance. Let them live near the bins down the back alley, though.

Edit: Seriously, I couldn't fucking imagine living in some ultra-santised dystopia like Singapore without getting abit nostalgic for some dirt. It's just fucking real, unlike the fake veneer of 'cleanliness' strived for over there.

It's all about your perceptions, not about reality.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

As far as Louise is concerned - your mam-in-law probably just wanted something to gas about. Fundamentally, we are conditioned to see litter as bad, BAD - for no real reason other than that its there, and doesn't represent the stern, self-controlled and orderly mentality prized so highly by our overlords and ancestors. Moaning about how people drop litter in cities is, in actual fact, no different in its philosophical outlook from bemoaning the fact the working-classes don't still spend 4 hours a day scrubbing at their doorstone and bleaching everything in the house.

Well where to begin DU: no recognition of agency (instead the tyranny of something called fundamental conditioning...not very Marxist of you), no recognition of the links between increased litter, increased vermin populations (that's rats) and decreased quality of life (or parhaps all those thinking their quality of life has been negatively affected are suffering from false consciouness..you could put 'em right though), and less than half baked analogies plucked out of thin air; good to see your customary posting standards being kept to.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

p.s. there's another obvious error in your post...can you spot it?

 

[TopCat]

Anyway, it sounds like a crap policy to me - though, with all the drunken misbehaviour in town centres (eg, in Croydon), it is easy to see why some will support it in the (probably vain) hope that it will improve things.

Croydon does not have a problem with drunken misbehaviour. It's safe at 7pm/10pm/2am.

This move is totally stupid. It will lead to more drug taking.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Dirty, dirty, dirty! The stern Victorian value in a clean home lead to such sterile home environments that modern children today actually have undeveloped immune systems through a lack of exposure to bacteria! The point about the old value in sterilising ones environment was that it fell very neatly into the then popular modernist narrative - that the sterilisation of our environment was actually a sign that humans were further removing themselves from barbarism and becoming more 'civilised'.

Infact it was nothing of the sort; it was a perfect case of supply creating demand, false demand about the myth of hygiene. Almost all sanitary products create themselves a false market through false propaganda about the severe health risks of not constantly cleansing yourself or your environment in some form or another.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/oct/24/advertising.asa

Don't fall for the lies. A few rats about here and there and a bit of grime never did no-one no harm. Don't be so bourgeois.

We get the message...you aren't going to tidy your room up...bless.

Louis MacNeice

 

[Das Uberdog]

My position is extremely Marxist (and Modernist) though I wouldn't expect you to be able to fathom how.

I don't think people are subject to a 'tyranny' of 'fundamental conditioning' from which they can't escape, but it's not a Marxist viewpoint to claim that people aren't socially conditioned, deuschbag.

 

[The Black Hand]

The fact that neither you nor DU can tell the difference between normal and desirable doesn't surprise me.

Talking bollocks again Louise. Funnily enough I am clear on the differences and that is why I only talked about 'normality'. You cannot add other 'things' into the equation, its like me saying you do not know the difference between 'normal' and bullshit. Hang on, perhaps you do! Your posting style is NORMALLY bullshit

 

[kyser_soze]

All this despite the well known correlation between sanitation and public health, especially in areas of high population density.

Of course health and hygeine have been fetishised - that's the nature of capitalism, not to mention a very specific psychology regarding human waste, but to turn that into a some kind of justification for dropping litter and blaming it on society...there's a part of me that wants to laugh and a part that wants to cry.

 

[Louis MacNeice]

My position is extremely Marxist (and Modernist) though I wouldn't expect you to be able to fathom how.

I don't think people are subject to a 'tyranny' of 'fundamental conditioning' from which they can't escape, but it's not a Marxist viewpoint to claim that people aren't socially conditioned, deuschbag.

Well if they can escape what is the reason for dropping litter?
Who claimed that people aren't socially conditioned?
Why can't you spell douchebag?

Louis MacNeice

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Talking bollocks again Louise. Funnily enough I am clear on the differences and that is why I only talked about 'normality'. You cannot add other 'things' into the equation, its like me saying you do not know the difference between 'normal' and bullshit. Hang on, perhaps you do! Your posting style is NORMALLY bullshit

You didn't just talk about normality, would also said that people didn't prefer less litter - you know where you talked about lack of nostalgia for a litter free past...do keep up.

Louis MacNeice

 

[Das Uberdog]

Well if they can escape what is the reason for dropping litter?
Who claimed that people aren't socially conditioned?
Why can't you spell douchebag?

Louis MacNeice

Moron who can't understand Marxism? Must be...

Oh well - it was bound to fail eventually.

 

[The Black Hand]

You didn't just talk about normality, would also said that people didn't prefer less litter - you know where you talked about lack of nostalgia for a litter free past...do keep up.

Louise McKnowfekall

DU dU der Dimwit. ADd and twist and turn like a twisty turny thing and you still talk bullshit lois.

 

[Das Uberdog]

...but to turn that into a some kind of justification for dropping litter and blaming it on society...

You misunderstand; I'm justifying the dropping of litter without feeling the need to blame anyone.

That's not to say I think litter should be allowed to just pile up - I'll quote from an earlier post of mine:

Within reason, I think that both give a city character as much as anything else.

I believe litter collection should be seen as a social service, not as an unfortunate by-product of the actions of social deviants.

 

[kyser_soze]

So you can't be arsed to simply drop litter in a bin, or if a bin isn't around, take the rubbish home with you?

 

[Das Uberdog]

I can count on one hand the number of times I've dropped litter. I remember every occasion in detail, the act of dropping it came so reluctantly. But I recognise that reaction is the product of a pretty moral upbringing in a post-Protestant/Methodist household.

 

[kyser_soze]

Good thread

 

[In Bloom]

After the revolution, I'm getting a Das Uberdog of my very own as a pet

 

[kyser_soze]

Surely Uberdogs won't exist, since all dogs will have been emancipated.

 

[In Bloom]

Fucking AR hippies ruin everything

 

[Louis MacNeice]

Moron who can't understand Marxism? Must be...

Oh well - it was bound to fail eventually.

So no answer...no surprise.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Louis MacNeice]

DU dU der Dimwit. ADd and twist and turn like a twisty turny thing and you still talk bullshit lois.

More unintelligible drivel...no surprise.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice

 

[Das Uberdog]

Plenty of answers, I just can't be arsed taking you through the basics of Marxism you tool. Infact, it's you who're stating the positive;- that it is in some way 'un-Marxist' to accept people may develop a false consciousness, despite the fact Marx himself developed the ideas surrounding the false-consciousness (lumpen-prole, etcetera).

If your question had any validity, it may have well have been written as; 'if people are capable of achieving socialism, then how come we don't live in a socialist society'.

So, conclusively, Louise doesn't understand Marxism folks!

D-Dawg