Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Toynbee Weeps Crocodile Tears For The Underclass


Recommended Posts

All those doctrines have aims - explicit aims. Nazis want to kill jews, force all young people to run around for the fuhrer, mobilize and get liebensraum, communists want to bring in the ten planks - central banks, mass education etc

Capitalism doesn't have an aim, it's a methodology.

The aim of capitalism is for the means of production to be owned by and controlled by private individuals, and for this effort to be utilised to create profit for the owners. One could label Nazism as a 'methodology' for exterminating the Jewish race. My point is that you seem to want to divorce Capitalism from any of the actions of its adherents.

Edited by BoomBoom
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
The third way was about accepting capitalism in the expectation of being able to control it and redistribute the wealth

to the lower classes. It is reformist rather than revolutionary. But all New Labour have proved is that capitalism cannot be tamed in that way, the third way was an utter failure.

The rich will always get richer and the poor will always get poorer because that is what the Capitalist system is designed to do.

I think you credit the labour leadership with a greater level of idealism than is warranted.

The "new labour" agenda was only ever an entrenchment of the capitalist claw-back of the eighties..the real capitlaist reforms of Thatcher et al are still here alive and strong....

New labour just did it with a "friendlier face"

Edited by Steve Cook
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
The aim of capitalism is for the means of production to be owned by and controlled by private individuals, and for this effort to be utilised to create profit for the owners. One could label Nazism as a 'methodology' for exterminating the Jewish race. My point is that you seem to want to divorce Capitalism from any of the actions of its adherents.

of course he does. That way he can dismiss any of its failings as merely evidence of people who did not act in a truly capitalist fashion

The mark of a true ideologue

Edited by Steve Cook
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Steve Cook
Capitalism doesn't have an aim any more than Evolution has an aim.

Of course...because "capitalism" isn't an ideology. It's an "objective truth" that is "out there"...yes?

:lol:

ffs!

Edited by Steve Cook
Link to post
Share on other sites
The aim of capitalism is for the means of production to be owned by and controlled by private individuals, and for this effort to be utilised to create profit for the owners.

The aim of capitalism is for this obvious truth to be recognised. Ther are only private individuals and only individuals can use property. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar or a fool.

One could label Nazism as a 'methodology' for exterminating the Jewish race. My point is that you seem to want to divorce Capitalism from any of the actions of its adherents.

Of course I do. Just as science isn't any of the result you get from using it's methodology, capitalism isn't the hospitals, roads etc that using it's methodology might build.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The aim of capitalism is for this obvious truth to be recognised. Ther are only private individuals and only individuals can use property. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar or a fool.

Of course I do. Just as science isn't any of the result you get from using it's methodology, capitalism isn't the hospitals, roads etc that using it's methodology might build.

Does this web of semantics serve any purpose other than obfuscation of the argument against a purely capitalist system? We judge any ideology on the basis of the society it creates.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does this web of semantics serve any purpose other than obfuscation of the argument against a purely capitalist system? We judge any ideology on the basis of the society it creates.

Do you?

I judge things with how closely they describe reality. This means I prefer methods over aims.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Capitalism isn't an ideology. I think Objectivism tried to build an ideology around it but I don't care for it because it's supererogation. There is no teleological process in Capitalism, it works as a feedback mechanism.

Weber "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism"?

So not an ideology as such but worthy of consideration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course...because "capitalism" isn't an ideology. It's an "objective truth" that is "out there"...yes?

Free market capitalism is not an ideology, unlike Nazism or NuLabism. It's what people do when there are no 'ideological' men with guns trying to force them to do anything else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fascism is where government is run for the benefit of large corporations and not the individual.

If the word "capitalism" has been perverted in most peoples minds by statist cronyism, how about we just say ultra-individualist or even ultra-libertarian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not content with ripping off the concept behind the 'nickel and dimed' book, Polly is back at it fighting the good fight for the great unwashed. It's not that the book does no raise a lot of very valid points, but Toynbee's motivation is less than pure. She reviles these 'unjust rewards' because they do not come her way in sufficient quantity, and writing books like this for Guardian readers helps her get closer to the only thing in life she really wants, to be as filthy rich and undeserving as those she decries.

I'm not her biggest fan. Can't stand her actually.

But why do you presume to know what she really wants? Can you read her mind?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fascism is where government is run for the benefit of large corporations and not the individual.

If the word "capitalism" has been perverted in most peoples minds by statist cronyism, how about we just say ultra-individualist or even ultra-libertarian.

Non-interventionist?

no government?

An Archy?

I could get behind that.

However, it's an erroneous argument, because it depends on 'trickle down' economics, the efficacy of which depends on those 'private individuals' possessing vast resources (Who we used to call Kings, by the way) having a social conscience.

Is deception equivalent to violence?

Is it right that a man who cons a little old lady out of her life savings for a promise he has no intention of honouring should be allowed to prosper under the auspices of "Laissez-Faire?"

Is it right that the oligarchies of the past be allowed to control and monopolise essential commodities which determine whether an individual lives or dies?

There has to be an element of government in Washington's words; "By the people, of the people, for the people."

Let's take the Firestone argument. The tyres were defective. However, the makers rationalised that if they exploded, someone died and sued them, provided they settled out of court they could stand to kill around thirty people before it became more cost-effective to do a product recall. So they sat on their hands and waited for the lawsuits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Toynbee lost the last vestige of credibility in my eyes when she went on 'Any Questions?' criticising the British middle class for undermining the rural economies of European countries by buying holiday homes there, and then appeared on 'Excess Baggage' about a fortnight later praising Ryanair to the skies (dreadful pun, I know) for enabling Joe Public to broaden his cultural horizons, noting in passing that she used the airline to commute to her holiday home in Tuscany.

Ghastly NuLab hypocrite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Something like that, yeah.

I like describing it as mercantile statism, myself.

I've always thought it resembles the Corporate Fascism of Mussollini's Pre war Italy.

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't agree with you about capitalism but the bizarre thing is that new Labourites are far more craven in their defence of extreme wealth than the Tories could ever be. They are so craven.

It's the recent convert thing.. plus a fair few seem to have gone straight from 'government is best at everything' to 'markets are best at everything' without traversing the full range of options inbetween.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Polly Toynbee really is your classic middle class liberal 'do gooder'. She comes from an extremely well-connected and privileged background, and if she had any brains or ability she would be one those high flying city types and lawyers herself. Instead she did badly in school, and then after her family connections got her into Oxford she dropped out.

I figure that deep down she realises she's only got on in life due to her background and not on merit, but she figures that if she uses her privilege, not for her benefit, but to 'do good' and help the poor and needy than that makes it alright (and if she acquires a few little perks along the way like a six figure salary and a villa Tuscany it'd be churlish not to take them, right?).

So I supect while she's partialy motivated by jealousy for all those A-grade students from the same background who are now in the top jobs, a lot of it is more about redeeming her privileged upbringing and assuaging her own guilt. Problem is, as has been established, she's not the sharpest cookie, and apart from her stints living like the common people (cue Jarvis Cocker) as research for her books, she doesn't really have any first hand experience if what it's like to live without over-wening privilege, so she actually makes a fairly clueless and patronising champion of the poor. She's popular with other well off lefties though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 440 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.