_angel_
.
Would you ask if people deserved the NAZI's?
UK public: Constantly dumped on. Is it some kind of Stockholm Syndrome thingy?
- Thread starter taffboy gwyrdd
- Start date
Would you ask if people deserved the NAZI's?
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Not some kind of Stockholm Syndrome, merely the result of the fact that, despite what many people on here would like to think, the majority of people in the UK have a good standard of living relative to not only most of the rest of the planet, but also at any other time in our history. It's difficult to get peopole motivated to change something when their basic living conditions aren't under immediate threat. Even the massed ranks of people on benefits, who would be the most obvious candidates for pushing for change, seem to be apathetic about the forthcoming changes. Perhaps this will change as the recession sends more people to the dole office and there are more repossession, but I doubt it - even if 1 million people lost their homes, and they all took to the streets to protest, you're still only looking at 2% of the total UK population.
In terms of the surveillance stuff, the recent stuff about clamping down on councils using RIPA etc to spy on people demonstrates, to me, that the 'surveillance state' is becoming aware of where the 'tax protest' limit on such activity - i.e. a similar situation to how the fuel protests started - will lie.
In terms of the surveillance stuff, the recent stuff about clamping down on councils using RIPA etc to spy on people demonstrates, to me, that the 'surveillance state' is becoming aware of where the 'tax protest' limit on such activity - i.e. a similar situation to how the fuel protests started - will lie.
_angel_
.
I'm not quite sure that people on benefits are 'apathetic', there have been some protests but mainly ignored.. I think most people are concentrating on keeping their heads above water. If you imagine most people on benefit are mainly carers of someone sick or disabled, a lone parent or sick and disabled themselves in some way, then the govt know that they are in no position to "take to the street" mainly, that's why they can do what they want.
I think the media are waking up to the fact life is not a picnic for people on JSA, there are suddenly more stories about how ludicrously low the amount of money is to live on, for example.
Not to my dog......
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
I don't agree with this 'the govt keeps people so poor they can't take to the streets' argument. Look around the world at people who are taking to the streets and they're all poor, and I don't believe that they have fewer familial obligations then people in the UK WRT to caring etc - probably have more in many cases.
taffboy gwyrdd
Embrace the confusion!
They were democratically elected.
_angel_
.
Not 'poor' but if you are spending your life running around after other people (esp looking after someone sick, no, you will not be likely to see those people take to the street)
I think you mix 'poor' up with 'caring responsibilities'.
As you say, most people in this country are well off enough and don't feel the need to take to the street.
You don't very often see people looking after the chronically sick, disabled (or them themselves) or single parents, or elderly, taking to the streets, however.
If a lot of able bodied, previously well off middle class people get shat on (en masse) then you may see a difference.
Like you said- it would have to affect a lot of people before that is likely to happen.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
No they weren't. You should know this.
_angel_
.
But people somehow "deserved" them
(ie I am thinking about their victims here) That's why it is so stupid when people say stuff like "people get the govt they deserve" when the people getting the poor end of the deal more than likely didn't vote for them anyway.Good post.
And also I find it a little bit hard to stomach that when we DO get the sort of serious resistance to the status quo in the form of the fuel protests and more recently the mass walk-outs from Refinerys and so on those who seem so quick to slate people for not doing anything suddenly seem to be taking backward steps because of what I see as 'fashion' issues i.e climate and race.
Corax
Luke 5:16
Way to jump the Godwin.
Its got nothing to do with stockholm syndrome but everything to do IMO with the nature o fthe politcal/radical alternatives on offer. All these alternatives are basically white , middleclass, and socially hierachical. Yet even to point this out is a sin on urban. The eds usual self indulgent repsonse sadly sums up this sort of 'Daily Mail marries Gaurdian ' attitude many involved with alternative politics currently possess. It is this whole 'better than' attitude which puts people of off politics. Then there is the fact that those with the knowledge and skills needed to help , say the poorest develop a politcal movement/voice are not interested in the issues facing these people.The left as exemplified by duruti2 recently have brought into this whole idea of 'relativism' . Current thinking with regards to the poorest right across the politcal spectrum including radical politics can be summed up thus:
" well they're not living in a shanty town so whats there problem
"
Well the problem is that this acceptence of relativist thinking actually brings down living standards for those in the third world, if the welfare state continues to be eroded and it will under the tories , it allows also governments across the world as a whole to erode ideas of,a nd arguements for welfare and ideas of social democracy as a whole. This is the hypocritical heart of humanism- it has accepted the concept of 'relativism' - as conceptualised by a neo-con agenda, with the consequences of making the progressive ideas of 'humanism' ( as historically based ) irrelevant on a materialistic level. Why should third world countries implement a welfare state, or spend more money on the poor when the developed world are busy dismantling theres own welfare aparatus?
You see just becasue people are not buying the complete works of marx in there millions does not mean that they do not possess 'class concoussness' indeed the disturbing thing we are now seeing with the rise of the far right is the merger of this class counciousness with the politics of race, as a result of the radical left and others now only being interested in pressure group politics, and laughing smugly at those they deem lumpen
" well they're not living in a shanty town so whats there problem
" Well the problem is that this acceptence of relativist thinking actually brings down living standards for those in the third world, if the welfare state continues to be eroded and it will under the tories , it allows also governments across the world as a whole to erode ideas of,a nd arguements for welfare and ideas of social democracy as a whole. This is the hypocritical heart of humanism- it has accepted the concept of 'relativism' - as conceptualised by a neo-con agenda, with the consequences of making the progressive ideas of 'humanism' ( as historically based ) irrelevant on a materialistic level. Why should third world countries implement a welfare state, or spend more money on the poor when the developed world are busy dismantling theres own welfare aparatus?
You see just becasue people are not buying the complete works of marx in there millions does not mean that they do not possess 'class concoussness' indeed the disturbing thing we are now seeing with the rise of the far right is the merger of this class counciousness with the politics of race, as a result of the radical left and others now only being interested in pressure group politics, and laughing smugly at those they deem lumpen
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
No, they were a parliamentary minority whose leader was asked (as a "cunning plan" by certain aristocratic fuckwits) to head a governing coalition, and who then assumed absolute power in what amounted to a coup.
Similar threads
