build a wall round the poor

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Why do you think that?

Cutting housing benefits is entirely consistent with the general tory approach of cutting all other sorts of benefits, made populist by "mother of 17 living in million pound mansion in mayfair gets 500,000 a week in benefits" type tabloid press hype. If it didn't have the effect of forcing poor people out of central London but bolloxing them up in some other way instead, it would still be entirely consistent with everything else they do. So how do you deduce that it's motivated by social engineering?

i think this is a bit of a non-discussion to be honest. they knew exactly what would happen if they cut housing benefits. that's all.

i dispute this idea that the tories even have a consistent ideology other than benefiting the rich. what is it? free market is just a buzzword, they're not consistently in favour of a free market in reality. it's like that recent picture circulated with a group of tories laughing and the caption "and then we told them wealth would trickle down!" It's whatever works for them at a particular time.
 
Last edited:

luka

Well-known member
http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_4_the_barbarians.html

to link paris with south africa

'An apartment in this publicly owned housing is also known as a logement, a lodging, which aptly conveys the social status and degree of political influence of those expected to rent them. The cités are thus social marginalization made concrete: bureaucratically planned from their windows to their roofs, with no history of their own or organic connection to anything that previously existed on their sites, they convey the impression that, in the event of serious trouble, they could be cut off from the rest of the world by switching off the trains and by blockading with a tank or two the highways that pass through them, (usually with a concrete wall on either side), from the rest of France to the better parts of Paris. I recalled the words of an Afrikaner in South Africa, who explained to me the principle according to which only a single road connected black townships to the white cities: once it was sealed off by an armored car, “the blacks can foul only their own nest.”'
 

zhao

there are no accidents
you can build a wall around them or you can...

29b221c9f7eab5008c5451a8a05590f5.jpg


"The 'Hobo' part [of the title] came about as a friend of mine, who commutes through Washington, DC, was constantly sending me camera phone pictures of hobos along his route, and making jokes about "hunting" them as he drove. He also told me that a group of attorneys (at a prestigious firm I won't name) all do the same, and that really triggered the idea behind the app.

"There are in-app purchases available, basically bundles of various weapons overlays. They vary from swords and knives to guns and such. These are really what drive the core concept of the game, as they appear on the screen and it looks as though these weapons are aimed at whatever you are taking a picture of. Thus the 'hunt' aspect."

http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/hobo-hunt-is-appaling
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
i dispute this idea that the tories even have a consistent ideology other than benefiting the rich. what is it? free market is just a buzzword, they're not consistently in favour of a free market in reality.
I don't think that they have an ideology in the same way that Trotskyites or fundamentalist christians have an ideology, but I think there's a distinctive and specific worldview and value set that underpins Conservative policy, albeit one that's watered down and distorted by the usual political compromises, cronyism, pragmatism, nest-feathering and so on that affects all politicians to some extent.

I'd say that conservatism is built on a view of how the world works, essentially based on an exaggerated sense of individual agency ("I'm sure they could find a job if they want to" / "if they've got no qualifications they should have worked harder at school") and of how it Should Be, based on a concept of fairness and deservingness ("why should my tax money that I worked hard for pay for rural buses that I don't use" / "why should someone on the dole get more in benefits than I get for working").

I'm sure it's not consistently applied, but I think the ideology is basically there.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
value set that underpins Conservative policy, albeit one that's watered down and distorted by the usual political compromises, cronyism, pragmatism, nest-feathering and so on that affects all politicians to some extent.

I'd say that conservatism is built on a view of how the world works, essentially based on an exaggerated sense of individual agency ("I'm sure they could find a job if they want to" / "if they've got no qualifications they should have worked harder at school") and of how it Should Be, based on a concept of fairness and deservingness ("why should my tax money that I worked hard for pay for rural buses that I don't use" / "why should someone on the dole get more in benefits than I get for working").

lack of empathy with anyone but the privileged, basically, and ultimately lack of empathy with anyone. yeah, it would be splitting hairs to argue what makes an ideology - the important thing is that they are hateful people who must be stopped.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
lack of empathy with anyone but the privileged, basically, and ultimately lack of empathy with anyone. yeah, it would be splitting hairs to argue what makes an ideology - the important thing is that they are hateful people who must be stopped.

A lot of people who aren't particularly privileged are quite conservative too, though. I suppose my dad's quite small-c conservative about economic issues (can't recall either of my parents ever actually voting, which I find a bit weird, but anyway) and he grew up in a pretty modest working/lower-middle class household, went to a really dire school where he was often in trouble, left with literally no qualifications, did a whole shitload of different jobs (ran a pub, drilled for oil in the North Sea, you name it), ended up running his own business and eventually retired about ten years ago. Yer actual bona-fide self-made man. The sort of person who doesn't fit into the standard socialist narrative whereby everyone's lot in life is determined from the moment they're born because 'by rights' he ought to be on benefits somewhere in a crappy little flat, if not on the streets or in the nick.

It would be much more difficult for him to do all that these days since you need a typewritten CV to get a job in fucking Tesco. I guess he was part of that postwar generation who enjoyed the two- or three-decade window in which there was real class mobility in the UK, where a lot people made that jump from working class to middle class. That's been steadily eroding since the '80s and has now gone into total free fall, of course.
 
Last edited:

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
sure, wasn't disputing that the people who are conservative are sometimes themselves not privileged, just that voting conservative/supporting it is essentially siding with those who have privilege, earned or not.

I don't think that is the standard socialist narrative. The standard socialist narrative encompasses the observation that some people who've come from nothing and 'make it', tend to view dimly those who came from nothing and didn't make it. Just because they have made it (your dad sounds like he had an aptitude for business, for example), doesnt' meant that everyone else will, or should have to be exceptional in a money-making pursuit in order to have a crack at a good life.

Yep, totally agree with the historical bit. Plus, as well, it's really unclear what most rich people actually do for their money these days.

A lot of people who aren't particularly privileged are quite conservative too, though. I suppose my dad's quite small-c conservative about economic issues (can't recall either of my parents ever actually voting, which I find a bit weird, but anyway) and he grew up in a pretty modest working/lower-middle class household, went to a really dire school where he was often in trouble, left with literally no qualifications, did a whole shitload of different jobs (ran a pub, drilled for oil in the North Sea, you name it), ended up running his own business and eventually retired about ten years ago. Yer actual bona-fide self-made man. The sort of person who doesn't fit into the standard socialist narrative whereby everyone's lot in life is determined from the moment they're born because 'by rights' he ought to be on benefits somewhere in a crappy little flat, if not on the streets or in the nick.

It would be much more difficult for him to do all that these days since you need a typewritten CV to get a job in fucking Tesco. I guess he was part of that postwar generation who enjoyed that two- or three-decade window in which there was real class mobility in the UK, where a lot people made that jump from working class to middle class. That's been steadily eroding since the '80s and has now gone into total free fall, of course.
 

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
I don't think that is the standard socialist narrative. The standard socialist narrative encompasses the observation that some people who've come from nothing and 'make it', tend to view dimly those who came from nothing and didn't make it. Just because they have made it (your dad sounds like he had an aptitude for business, for example), doesnt' meant that everyone else will.
Well, yes.

And the conservative viewpoint is that essentially everyone could do that if they had the motivation.

It's not "I don't care what happens to poor people because they aren't me", it's "poor people would do much better for themselves if they were only motivated to do it (by giving them the option of doing better for themselves or going on the streets...)".
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Well, yes.

And the conservative viewpoint is that essentially everyone could do that if they had the motivation.

It's not "I don't care what happens to poor people because they aren't me", it's "poor people would do much better for themselves if they were only motivated to do it (by giving them the option of doing better for themselves or going on the streets...)".

hmm, i dunno, depends how stupid they are. i think some conservatives know exactly how difficult it is for some people and don't care, and some simply don't understand. not sure which ones i despise more.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
I don't think that is the standard socialist narrative. The standard socialist narrative encompasses the observation that some people who've come from nothing and 'make it', tend to view dimly those who came from nothing and didn't make it.

Well maybe I was caricaturing it a bit, but it's hard not to get the impression that some people think the socioeconomic conditions we're born into - while obviously very important - are so important that they invariably trump whatever personal differences exist between people.

Just because they have made it (your dad sounds like he had an aptitude for business, for example), doesnt' meant that everyone else will, or should have to be exceptional in a money-making pursuit in order to have a crack at a good life.

Yeah, my dad has an aptitude for business (far moreso than I do, incidentally, and I'm the one with the good school grades and the letters after my name). You can't prevent business-minded people from being good at business without doing something totally nuts like banning private enterprise entirely - though of course no-one but dyed-in-the-wool communists actually supports that position. I agree that you shouldn't have have to have a razor-sharp business mind to be able to earn a decent living and I think this country criminally undervalues lots of people who do very demanding and important jobs while criminally overvaluing people whose job, at heart, is to gamble for high stakes with other people's money.
 
Last edited:

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Yeah, but the correlation between what social situation one was born into and where one ends up on the social 'ladder', is very strong in Britain, so it is probably the main factor. The way many industries' employment are set up (in various ways) guarantees that - need for degrees, need for work experience which is very frequently unpaid, etc. I've worked in a fair few industries and there's always been a class element at play.

Sure, sure - business is fine, what isn't fine is the way it's set up - easy to exploit people, most people feeling alienated from their work, people at the top getting crazy money, the idea that the five-day week is inarguably the only way, etc etc.


Well maybe I was caricaturing it a bit, but it's hard not to get the impression that some people think the socioeconomic conditions we're born into - while obviously very important - are so important that they invariably trump whatever personal differences exist between people.

Yeah, my dad has an aptitude for business (far moreso than I do, incidentally, and I'm the one with the good school grades and the letters after my name). You can't prevent business-minded people from being good at business without doing something totally nuts like banning private entirely entirely - though of course no-one but dyed-in-the-wool communists actually supports that position. I agree that you shouldn't have have to have a razor-sharp business mind to be able to earn a decent living and I think this country criminally undervalues lots of people who do very demanding and important jobs while criminally overvaluing people whose job, at heart, is to gamble for high stakes with other people's money.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
Sure, sure - business is fine, what isn't fine is the way it's set up - easy to exploit people, most people feeling alienated from their work, people at the top getting crazy money, the idea that the five-day week is inarguably the only way, etc etc.

Agreed completely. And it seems that the bias inherent in British business regulation is more and more in favour of huge multinationals and against small independent businesses. Not that smaller businesses never exploit their employees, of course, but huge chains that form monopolies can exploit their employees, their customers and their suppliers, and now they're even benefiting from unpaid labour - essentially a state subsidy for supermarkets.

You only have to look at the state of the average UK high street to see just how extreme it's got. I'm reminded of the Time Trumpet episode about Tesco declaring war on Denmark...
 
Last edited:

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Agreed completely. And it seems that the bias inherent in British business regulation is more and more in favour of huge multinationals and against small independent businesses. Not that smaller businesses never exploit their employees, of course, but huge chains that form monopolies can exploit both employees and customers, and now they're even benefiting from unpaid labour - essentially a state subsidy for supermarkets.

You only have to look at the state of the average UK high street to see just how extreme it's got. I'm reminded of the Time Trumpet episode about Tesco declaring war on Denmark...

I thought of that this week too... When the slogan changed from 'Every little helps' to 'We control every part of your life'.
 
Top