The Death Penalty – What’s All the Fuzz About?

[Mr. Tea]

Ah, ok. I think you're right, and probably a little more true of the situation in the U.K. vis-a-vis the one in the U.S. (since we have more space literal and otherwise for newcomers here)

That's exactly it: Britain is a very crowded country, England even more so, and the south of England (which is receiving the most immigrants) even more so still. Immigration, coupled with more people living alone and people living longer, is putting a massive strain on the housing market, not to mention many other services.

 

[crackerjack]

It would most likely even be profitable to them - sell more antidepressants, build more prisons etc.

And Ingmar Bergman DVDs, Joy Division reissues...

 

[noel emits]

I always suspected Ian Curtis was structurally unsound.

And lol by the way.

 

[Mr. Tea]

And Ingmar Bergman DVDs, Joy Division reissues...

...web servers hosting hyper-analytical, dubstep-obsessed discussion forums...

 

[noel emits]

Ah, ok. I think you're right, and probably a little more true of the situation in the U.K. vis-a-vis the one in the U.S. (since we have more space literal and otherwise for newcomers here)

Indeed.

It brings up a similar point though. Would it not be useful now to make appeals to the conservative / christian lobbies in the US an the grounds that unfettered capitalism and hijacked government can clearly be shown to be highly incompatible with their own stated beliefs, ethics and even personal interests?

 

[nomadologist]

Indeed.

It brings up a similar point though. Would it not be useful now to make appeals to the conservative / christian lobbies in the US an the basis that unfettered capitalism and hijacked government can clearly be shown to be highly incompatible with their own stated beliefs, ethics and even personal interests?

You can try, but I doubt they'd be very receptive to that message!

 

[noel emits]

You can try, but I doubt they'd be very receptive to that message!

"If the truth can be told so as to be understood it will be believed."

I can imagine what the responses might be, not least 'what's the alternative' of course.

But I think the tools of persuasion are all there in the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the teachings of The Naz.

 

[zhao]

I find it strange that you condemn the superficiality of other people's grasp of Islam without having intimate knowledge yourself of its sacred text

there is nothing wrong with urging people to find out more about the rich and layered history of Islam (as I am trying to do) at a time when the prevailing reaction in "the west" is knee jerk criticism of a cardboard cut-out version of it without historical context.

there is nothing wrong with urging people to do this without having read the source text. (not that it matters, but it's on my reading list)

what is important is how religous texts are interpreted and applied politically.

yes, but it's not the only important thing. what i see today is a lot of flat out dismissal of a tradition, a wealth of information and a way of life that has benefited people for a long long time. the equivalent of dismissing Marxism by the deeds of Stalin or Mao. or dismissing Buddhism by its commodification at the hands of life-style junky neo-liberal yuppies (which people here are very fond of doing).

i'm just urging for some much needed historical perspective, because i think it important to understand where something comes from, how it has been changed to become what it is today.

 

[Slothrop]

If someone ends up either on the dole or working cash-in-hand for some friend of a cousin of an uncle, as a result of being unable to speak English, I can't see how that benefits either the Government or big corporations.

It's not a problem for them either - they still buy stuff and the money to cover benefits comes mostly from tax on the middle class / middle income groups. People in this position pose no threat to big biz unless they become politically powerful as a group.

But they aren't just interested in people posing no threat - least of all in these days of anticapitalist-consumerism and the lifestyle section of the Guardian. They're trying to make as much money out of people as possible, and they've going to make a lot more money out of people who are working and buying consumer goods than they are out of people who are living on benefits and surviving on lentils because they can't get a job due to an unneccessary barrier.

Arguably a large pool of poor people to use as cheap labour is beneficial to them - tbh the causality and balancing-off around skill and education levels, employment and wage levels, how much surplus value people produce and how much product they consume confuses me - but a large pool of poor people who are poor because they're artificially blocked from getting a job is no use at all.

 

[noel emits]

But they aren't just interested in people posing no threat - least of all in these days of anticapitalist-consumerism and the lifestyle section of the Guardian. They're trying to make as much money out of people as possible, and they've going to make a lot more money out of people who are working and buying consumer goods than they are out of people who are living on benefits and surviving on lentils because they can't get a job due to an unneccessary barrier.

I didn't say they are just interested in people posing no threat. I mentioned that because it's one large factor in how the system is set up. It might be th only thing they have to really worry about now though. As you say they can make money out of nearly any situation.

But then they are not really trying to 'make as much money as possible' - that would be too easy as they 'make' it anyway, what they are interested in is keeping 'all' of it. It's almost impossible to avoid contributing to this. If you are on benefits in the UK where do you think that money finally ends up? Where does Housing Benefit go? Who profits out of the NHS? Don't be fooled - poor people on benefits work quite well for these purposes.

Arguably a large pool of poor people to use as cheap labour is beneficial to them - tbh the causality and balancing-off around skill and education levels, employment and wage levels, how much surplus value people produce and how much product they consume confuses me - but a large pool of poor people who are poor because they're artificially blocked from getting a job is no use at all.

It doesn't really matter if people work. What matters is the message that you 'must work' and how that operates as a control mechanism. Most 'employment' doesn't consist of producing value in a any meaningful sense. The majority of jobs are there to keep the system of consumption going and to keep people occupied and chasing their tails.

 

[mixed_biscuits]

there is nothing wrong with urging people to do this without having read the source text..

The Koran has to be read if you want to pretend to know anything about Islam!

the equivalent of dismissing Marxism by the deeds of Stalin or Mao.

Yes, but it seems appropriate to dismiss Marxism by damning the projects that it has inspired, as with Marxists tending to be people who have their beliefs influence their actions, people are mainly concerned as to what those actions might be!

 

[Slothrop]

I didn't say they are just interested in people posing no threat. I mentioned that because it's one large factor in how the system is set up. It might be th only thing they have to really worry about now though. As you say they can make money out of nearly any situation.

But then they are not really trying to 'make as much money as possible' - that would be too easy as they 'make' it anyway, what they are interested in is keeping 'all' of it. It's almost impossible to avoid contributing to this. If you are on benefits in the UK where do you think that money finally ends up? Where does Housing Benefit go? Who profits out of the NHS? Don't be fooled - poor people on benefits work quite well for these purposes.

It doesn't really matter if people work. What matters is the message that you 'must work' and how that operates as a control mechanism. Most 'employment' doesn't consist of producing value in a any meaningful sense. The majority of jobs are there to keep the system of consumption going and to keep people occupied and chasing their tails.

Firstly, this seems to be ascribing a bit too much self awareness to the system - surely capitalism functions as a lot of self-interested organisations trying to make themselves better off, rather than via some central committee deciding what's in the best interests of capitalism as a whole. No company decides to employ more people because otherwise they might get ideas about not having to work, they employ more people because they think they can make money out of it. And they then influence government policy in a manner that enables them to make money as effectively as possible.

And secondly, the amount of consumption you can do on state benefits is pretty sharply circumscribed. You're going to do a whole lot more if you've got a reasonably paid job. You don't suddenly stop using the NHS. You pay your own rent rather than getting housing benefits, so they aren't losing that. And you spend a great deal more on fast cars, consumer electronics, food, drink, nice furniture, clothes, the lot. And when all that goes to make the people who are influencing government policy richer, what incentive have they got to keep people out of work so they can keep getting at their £46 a week?

 

[Mr. Tea]

Exactly: you can't be much of a consumer when you're on the dole.

 

[nomadologist]

But Slothrop, the point of encouraging (often illegal) immigration would be not to bring more superconsumers into the U.S., but to create an underclass of people who will work at a much lower than "living" wage. This cheap labor would be exploited to cut production costs and "overhead" so that profit margins would gain given the existing middle class customer base's purchasing habits remained the same.

An influx of cheap labor would suit the purposes of any business, but particularly those that, say, require the employment of factory workers, or a large number of any type of unskilled workers. Class stratification is the real biproduct of late capitalism, as we've seen--the point of capitalism isn't to make *everyone* more money, there is no sort of trickledown effect, the point is to make capitalholders more money.

 

[nomadologist]

yes, but it's not the only important thing. what i see today is a lot of flat out dismissal of a tradition, a wealth of information and a way of life that has benefited people for a long long time. the equivalent of dismissing Marxism by the deeds of Stalin or Mao. or dismissing Buddhism by its commodification at the hands of life-style junky neo-liberal yuppies (which people here are very fond of doing).

Actually, I reject Buddhism on the same grounds I would Islam or any other religious belief system I've encountered so far in life, and that's on the basis of their tenets.

 

[zhao]

The Koran has to be read if you want to pretend to know anything about Islam!

agree. but i never pretended to know anything about Islam! all i did was quote from a book i'm reading, and put forth the idea that there is more to it than what it has become / what it has been used for.

Yes, but it seems appropriate to dismiss Marxism by damning the projects that it has inspired, as with Marxists tending to be people who have their beliefs influence their actions, people are mainly concerned as to what those actions might be!

yes it can be criticized based on its interpretations but Marxism has much to offer besides the projects it has inspired!

 

[mixed_biscuits]

agree. but i never pretended to know anything about Islam! all i did was quote from a book i'm reading, and put forth the idea that there is more to it than what it has become / what it has been used for.

Aye

yes it can be criticized based on its interpretations but Marxism has much to offer besides the projects it has inspired!

Aye

 

[zhao]

Actually, I reject Buddhism on the same grounds I would Islam or any other religious belief system I've encountered so far in life, and that's on the basis of their tenets.

do you also dismiss johnny cash because there is a dodgy "best of" for sale at Starbucks? may not be the best example but you get me?

 

[nomadologist]

Umm no. I'd do that because I don't like most of his music.

 

[mistersloane]

The Koran has to be read if you want to pretend to know anything about Islam!

ach, so much stuff has been reinterpreted by Maududi and Albanna and all that 12 century stuff that I think you can safely read around it without having read the core texts, you don't need to have read the bible to have an informed take on christianity. It would help, but you could read the koran and be no wiser as to why today's stuff is happening.