Worth dying for

[trouc]

I thought as much. Does Braudel differentiate between different forms of capitalism? For instance, in the quotes posted by dHarry, Braudel states that "[Capitalism] has always been associated with the ability to plan economic strategies and to control market dynamics, and therefore, with a certain degree of centralization and hierarchy." But that's clearly not true. There are variations, from once-ubiquitous socialist command and control economics, to the Keynesian demand management strategies of the 1970s, to the Austrian and Chicago School free markets of the 1980s. The idea that capitalism has always been a system of "arborescent" top-down control is simplistic. Capitalism is both an event and a process, as you point out upthread, and as such the devil remains in the details: yes, post-war France had its top-down, monopolistic dirigisme, but other countries took other routes. And before the war, France was a different (more laissez-faire) story still.



I'm just assuming that Braudel means a price-controlling cartel, be it large corporation, government agency or local farmer.

So you might point to your example, which might or might not be evidence of price control (intentional collusion), but what does Braudel say about international price convergence of wheat under the first instance of globalisation? It's not always about individual entities controling markets to the disadvantage the many.

Vim, the book was written about the 1400-1800 time period, so he's not exactly discussing capitalist command economies (US after ww2, south korea, japan? etc). When he talks about centralization in the quote you used above he's primarily discussing it as a local phenomenon, referring to meat monopolies outside paris, local grain or silk cartels, etc, and only mentioning the non-local monopolies of Amsterdam as an afterthought. I'd recommend you pick it up yourself, it's a great book. Don't immediately skip to v2 though.

 

[vimothy]

Vim, the book was written about the 1400-1800 time period, so he's not exactly discussing capitalist command economies (US after ww2, south korea, japan? etc). When he talks about centralization in the quote you used above he's primarily discussing it as a local phenomenon, referring to meat monopolies outside paris, local grain or silk cartels, etc, and only mentioning the non-local monopolies of Amsterdam as an afterthought. I'd recommend you pick it up yourself, it's a great book. Don't immediately skip to v2 though.

It does sound interesting, perhaps I'll order it from the library and add it to the pile. One thing that I would say is that the extent to which an economy is command and control / planned (i.e. socialist) is the extent to which it is not capitalist, and the more capitalist, the less economic planning. So a command and control economy (heavily monopolistic), like the USSR or India after independence (and a whole host of others, especially in the third world) is much less economically free than a properly capitalist country like the Republic of Ireland or Hong Kong.

 

[Gavin]

Danger Danger

Watch out Dissensians:

An airport worker who wrote poems about beheadings is the first woman to be found guilty under new terror laws.

Samina Malik, who liked to call herself a "lyrical terrorist", called for attacks on the West and described "poisoned bullets" capable of killing an entire street in her poetry.

The 23-year-old Muslim wrote of her desire to become a martyr and listed her favourite videos as the "beheading ones".

Described (by whom? tricky passive voice)as a "committed Islamic extremist", Malik, a shop assistant at Heathrow, hoarded an extensive collection of terrorism manuals, the Old Bailey heard.

She was a member of an extremist group linked to Omar Bakri Mohammed, a hate preacher who fled to Lebanon from Britain two years ago.

Yesterday a jury found her guilty of possessing documents likely to be used for terrorism under the Terrorism Act 2000, by a majority of ten to one, after deliberating for 19 hours.

Malik, who wore a black head scarf, wept as the verdict was read out.

Earlier she was cleared of the more serious offence of having articles for a terrorist purpose.

"She is a committed Islamic extremist, who supports terrorism and terrorists.

"She had a library of material that she had collected for terrorist purposes.

"That collection would be extremely useful for someone planning terrorist activity."

The court heard how police raided her home in Southall, West London, after an email from her was found on the computer of a terror suspect in October last year.

She had a profile on the social networking website Hi-5, where she called for the execution of "depraved" Westerners .

The British-born Muslim (does this make her British or not British?) listed her interests as helping the Mujahideen "in any way I can".

Outside the court, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, head of the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Command, said: "Malik held violent extremist views which she shared with other like-minded people over the internet.

"Merely possessing this material is a serious criminal offence."

LYRICAL TERRORIST WATCH OUT she's got a LIBRARY!

ILLEGAL POETRY presumably does not incriminate the Daily Mail or those who "download such material on to their computers"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=492460&in_page_id=1770

 

[gek-opel]

LYRICAL TERRORIST WATCH OUT she's got a LIBRARY!

Haha

 

[Gavin]

She looks kinda cool in that pic... I wonder if she smokes weed wif infidels...

 

[Mr. Tea]

She looks kinda cool in that pic... I wonder if she smokes weed wif infidels...

Yeah, terrorism's well cool, innit.

 

[Gavin]

Yeah, terrorism's well cool, innit.

I admire anyone looking that blase while facing criminal charges for writing poetry and "sharing views"....

Aren't these the freedoms we invade other nations to provide?

 

[Mr. Tea]

I can't help wondering if you'd be leaping so quickly to defend this woman if she'd been a white supremacist writing material about wiping out Muslims, for example. Of course we have freedom of speech, but if she's putting hate-inciting material into the public domain (which she seems to have been doing) then she's guilty of, well, inciting hatred.

 

[Gavin]

I can't help wondering if you'd be leaping so quickly to defend this woman if she'd been a white supremacist writing material about wiping out Muslims, for example. Of course we have freedom of speech, but if she's putting hate-inciting material into the public domain (which she seems to have been doing) then she's guilty of, well, inciting hatred.

Yes actually I would, and there's no shortage of white supremacist writing all over the internet -- they don't wind up in court and slimed by right wing rags though. The ACLU defends the KKK is cases like this all the time which I support -- you don't fight ideas by censoring them. I posted this case because things this woman "did" (thought?) were done by people on this very thread.

That poetry inciting violence, hah... we should ban de Sade too I suppose...

 

[Mr. Tea]

That poetry inciting violence, hah... we should ban de Sade too I suppose...

Funnily enough, I can't remember the last time a twenty-something computer programmer from Birmingham was inspired to go on jihad after reading The 120 Days Of Sodom. (Although I like the idea that he might, on account of thinking it's a depiction of the sex life of the average modern infidel... )

Fair play if you'd also support someone's right to propagate KKK/NF-type material, although I'm not sure I'd agree.

 

[Gavin]

Fair play if you'd also support someone's right to propagate KKK/NF-type material, although I'm not sure I'd agree.

They'll propagate it anyway... Better to let them do it in the full light of the public sphere so everyone can see how stupid and shit their ideas are.

 

[noel emits]

Isn't the real effect of a high profile prosecution and media execution like this to spread more fear and uncertainty manufacturing further public consent for arbitrarily repressive legislation?

That poetry is pretty sick so why expose it to massive publicity if not to further add to the constructed image of the latest public enemy? I have little doubt that although there may or may not have been 'potential suicide bombers in our schools' (ffs!), it's a damn sight more likely that this girl will find sympathy now that she has indeed been 'martyred'.

It's been said before but it's worth paying attention to how closely religio-cultural tensions can resonate with what would otherwise be framed as regular teenage angst and rebellion. Religion is the new punk rock.

 

[Mr. Tea]

They'll propagate it anyway... Better to let them do it in the full light of the public sphere so everyone can see how stupid and shit their ideas are.

But what about the people who don't think the ideas are stupid and shit? This woman didn't write these poems for people to ridicule them, she did it so as to promote violence among like-minded, or potentially like-minded, people.

 

[noel emits]

But what about the people who don't think the ideas are stupid and shit? This woman didn't write these poems for people to ridicule them, she did it so as to promote violence among like-minded, or potentially like-minded, people.

See my post above - she's just been handed a massive international distribution deal by those that claim to want to censor her.

 

[Mr. Tea]

That poetry is pretty sick so why expose it to massive publicity if not to further add to the constructed image of the latest public enemy?

That's a good point, but I don't really see any alternatives other than not prosecuting at all, thus in effect abandoning laws against incitement-to-hatred, or having secret trials, which is just off the scale as far as authoritarian sinisterness is concerned. Remember that it's the press, not the judiciary, that creates the publicity.

Of course, we could have a less sensationalist, reactionary press, which would be fantastic - but how do you go about doing this without drastically further curtailing the kinds of freedoms these trials are all about?
Eeeurgh, knee-deep in a sticky moral morass already...

 

[Gavin]

But what about the people who don't think the ideas are stupid and shit? This woman didn't write these poems for people to ridicule them, she did it so as to promote violence among like-minded, or potentially like-minded, people.

Think about this: When there's a racist or bigoted Facebook group (which there are many), wouldn't you a) want to know what exactly these assholes are saying so you can counter it; and b) want to know who buys into it and how many so you know how widespread these "taboo" beliefs really are? Even if you don't get into the abstract right to free expression and the state's (or in this case, a corporation) role in regulating speech, there are pragmatic reasons too.

Interesting take over here: http://lecolonelchabert.blogspot.com/2007/09/undershaftism.html

This is one reason why anti-racist activism is so hamstrung in this country I think: overt racist speech is effectively barred from the public sphere so it goes underground, mutates into new forms, and continues to support a racist hierarchy in this country. So you have to run around continually proving that racism still exists because most people only know what gets shoved in their faces by TV. Like people forget a KKK Grand Dragon had a respectable showing in the Republican presidential primaries just 15 years ago.

 

[noel emits]

That's a good point, but I don't really see any alternatives other than not prosecuting at all, thus in effect abandoning laws against incitement-to-hatred, or having secret trials, which is just off the scale as far as authoritarian sinisterness is concerned. Remember that it's the press, not the judiciary, that creates the publicity.

Of course, we could have a less sensationalist, reactionary press, which would be fantastic - but how do you go about doing this without drastically further curtailing the kinds of freedoms these trials are all about?
Eeeurgh, knee-deep in a sticky moral morass already...

I think the first and key point to keep in mind is that it is a 'thought crime' she has committed and that our going down that route is the thin edge of a very nasty wedge indeed.

The press want stories but I think the Gov's attitude inevitably leads the way. There are many alternatives to prosecution, or at least approaches to it which do not simply and cartoonishly brand someone as 'evil'. Not sure what penalties she is potentially facing but I would like to see some kind of counseling or education suggested rather than just punitive measures. Can't really see that happening though, cos that's just not what it's really about in my view.

And of course then there's the old chestnut about tackling the causes of anti social behaviour - which for some reason the authorities never seem to actually manage to do. :slanted:

 

[Mr. Tea]

. Not sure what penalties she is potentially facing but I would like to see some kind of counseling or education suggested rather than just punitive measures.

There are no doubt some who would see attempts at 're-education' like this as in some roundabout po-mo sort of way more Orwellian than 'merely' locking someone up...though I hasten to add, I wouldn't be one of them. I think this route could well be a lot more constructive, actually.

 

[noel emits]

There are no doubt some who would see attempts at 're-education' like this as in some roundabout po-mo sort of way more Orwellian than 'merely' locking someone up...though I hasten to add, I wouldn't be one of them. I think this route could well be a lot more constructive, actually.

And out in the open as Gavin says. If we are all so opposed to attitudes like the ones this girl has (although she's probably just an angry kid) then where's the problem in sending her for classes on tolerance and education in comparative religion or something?

You're right though - I can envisage liberal outrage that we should suggest teaching people about different cultures, coz you know, that means you're not respecting their culture. What a paradox!

 

[hundredmillionlifetimes]

Your right though - I can envisage liberal outrage that we should suggest teaching people about different cultures, coz you know, that means you're not respecting their culture. What a paradox!

As AIPAC and other Zionist-Jewish lobbies in the US and Europe and supportive organisations continue their campaign to shut down all book-stores and libraries that stock copies of Mein Kampf and related incitement-to-hatred documentation, with the arrest and conviction of all their staff as terrorist conspirators, along with all members of the public in possession of such terrorist material, Liberal Outrage is Expressed as Anti-Semetic Pope is Arrested and Sent to Israeli Kibbutz for Re-Education