Years of liberal dogma spawned a generation

[hetrodoxly]

How can you decimate the lives of children? reduce them by 10 years?

The popular meaning is "to destroy" ie the lives of these children have been destroyed, if you want to take it back to it's original meaning? (strange) your assumption would be right, you must partake in some very unusual conversations.

[conspiracybeliever]

it is 100% about personal decisions and bad choices. it was that couples choice to have unprotected sex and have unwanted children,it was their choice to party drink and fight instead of learning a trade. its 100% their choice to riot and burn down their neighborhood...who made them do it? no one could make them better them selves,educate themselves,support their family..if we as society can not make them behave better because they choose to reject being a productive member of society,how are we making them riot..they choose it plain and simple.personal responsibility.

please your feminism is showing and its lacking,you blame a women getting pregnant on men,really? so your implying women are to stupid to protect them selves and men should be there to protect them by being then only responsible person at the party? those pregnant girls laid down and excepted the risks just as much as the man who was there....i think some of your femanazi counter parts might be insulted by that point of view..

i believe in welfare and helping someone who needs it,but i also believe nothing in life is free.ill help you but you have to go to school maintain a certain gpa,work what ever job deemed necessary or you loose benefits.i believe it should be a helping hand not a life time gift,you refuse to show progress and help yourself then your on your own.if you can grow up and do absolutely nothing and still maintain the life style youve had since you were a child.why would you better yourself? why go the extra step to do the right thing when doing nothing get you everything you need...

and before you fun loving liberals attack capitalism,remember without capitalist and hard working tax payers,there would be no money to support your liberal agendas...these kids are doing nothing less then biting the hand that feeds them,and still some people will sit back and try to make every excuse in the book for them...amazing

My feminism may be lacking. I wasn't trying to fit that stereotype either. There are two people to blame when a woman gets pregnant. I believe in helping people also. When they put some kind of effort into helping themselves. The majority of people that I have seen on welfare are two parent families. They have , hopefully, one working parent, the father, making minimum wage or a little more and have 2 to 5 kids. So they are supporting a wife and 2 to 5 kids on minimum wage or a little more than minimum wage. These are the welfare recipients I see all around me. There are some single mothers on welfare. Rarely do I see that single mother that you all speak of dropping kids left and right to get more welfare. But this seems to be ok with the world. Why is it that the tv doesn't talk about that? Is it because the tv doesn't want you to know that they are stereotyping or targeting working women?

[+DieChecker]

If it were truly liberal dogma that created this mess how is it the capitalists gained so much from it?

Because if you look at the Richest Politicians. Slightly more then half of them are Democrats. It is in the Liberal Politicians interest to increase his base of supporters and make himself rich in doing it. It is not like Federal Level Republicans are 99% rich and Democrats are all middle class. Far from it.

Edited August 14, 2011 by DieChecker

[conspiracybeliever]

Because if you look at the Richest Politicians. Slightly more then half of them are Democrats. It is in the Liberal Politicians interest to increase his base of supporters and make himself rich in doing it. It is not like Federal Level Republicans are 99% rich and Democrats are all middle class. Far from it.

Really!? I thought it was the single mothers causing all the problems.

[Blackwhite]

So in other words we should push marriage? Force women to stay home and drop babies and watch soap operas and cook and clean and wait on their man? That's the answer?

Nobody is forcing marriage. The government though is, quite rightly, planning on rewarding those who do marry, such as giving married couples tax breaks, as an incentive to get married.

Also, if a couple have a child I expect the woman to look after the child, feed it, change its nappies, and do the other work around the house whilst her husband is also working hard at the office, the building site or wherever he is working his butt off to make money for his family.

If the man is working hard away from home to give his wife money to spend I think it's perfectly reasonable for the wife to work hard at home looking after the baby as any responsible mother would.

The wife could also go to work and get a babysitter in to look after the baby whilst she and her husband work. However, research shows that housewives make better mothers than career women and it's also more advantageous for the child if its mother stays at home to look after it. A study by Cambridge University has found that increasing numbers of men AND women believe working mums are having a negative impact on family life. The suggestion is career and family can’t co-exist.

Apart from their mothers, children also need fathers in their lives. Having just a mother around and no father is not beneficial to a child, especially a male child, who needs not only a male role model in his life but a strong, disciplining father who scares him into behaving. Having his father as a male role model makes it less likely a boy will join a gang, and having a father who disciplines his son makes it less likely his son will break the law.

If rewarding marriage means more young men grow up with their fathers in their lives rather than just their mothers then it'll be a good thing.

'Support for working mums falls'

Growing numbers of people are concerned about the impact of working mothers on family life, a survey by Cambridge University suggests.

It compared results of social attitude polls from the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.

In 1998, 51% of women and 45.9% of men believed family life would not suffer if a woman went to work.

This had fallen to 46% of women and 42% of men in 2002, amid "growing sympathy" for the old-fashioned view women should be in the home and not the workplace.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7543576.stm

Edited August 14, 2011 by Blackwhite

[smurf0852]

I would bet that a lot, if not most, of the thugs causing trouble were from single parent families who have never seen their fathers.

For years, the Left in Britain have, for some reason, been against marriage and, unlike other countries, there are therefore no measures in place in Britain to reward marriage, such as tax breaks for married couples.

However, the Left in Britain loves to reward single motherhood by lavishing a huge and unnecessary amount of benefits and subsidies to single mothers.

However, a lot of research by experts over the years has shown that young people, especially boys, who grow up with no father and therefore no proper male role model are more likely to join violent gangs. This is because males are tribal and need to belong to a tribe or family. Having a father in the picture gives them this sense of alliance. Studies show that with no father figure in their lives boys are likelier to join gangs because they have to look outside the family for social acceptance. These gangs then take to our streets every night of the year - not just during riots - and cause ordinary people in many neighbourhoods to be too scared to leave their homes at night. And boys in Afro-Caribbean families in Britain are likelier to grow up in single parent families than boys of other ethnic persuasions.

Despite this, the Left for too long in this country has seen marriage, and the normal nuclear family of two parents - a father and a mother - as unnecessary (they love to promote marriage of people of the same sex, though).

So it was good to see Cameron in Parliament today giving two fingers to the Left by saying the Conservatives are to bring in measures, already in place in a lot of other countries, which will encourage and reward marriage - such as tax breaks for married couples - to try and get the number of young people in this country with no fathers in their lives cut dramatically and therefore reduce the number of young people joining violent gangs.

The anti-marriage policy of the Left has helped Britain's violent gangs to flourish.

http://thyblackman.com/2011/05/10/8-ways-black-dads-benefit-black-boys/

well yes and no liberal elements in this country have for years been against marriage. they saw it as women been forced into the servitude of men who would ultimatly force them to have baby after baby while beating them up from time to time for sport and dont forgrt the femanist mantra of all men are rapists. this isnt the opinion of the "left" as you put it the left believe marriage is a good thing two parents at home bringing up a family is what should happen .the issues you speak of are the fault of capitalism.we can no longer afford to have a parent stay at home to raise the children while the other one goes to work, wages are to low for this to happen .the result is that both parents need to work full time to make ends meet .the stress of this puts strain on relationships and the kids are raised by child minders if people can afford them or they raise themselves with pot noodles for tea and a fleeting at best relationship with there parents.

that is the best case senario what normally happens is the relationships break down and one parent ends up paying maintanence and the other living on benefits and unfortunatly everyone is better off.

everyone except the kids that is. until we start to value people over profits and pay people a living wage for the work they do the rot in our country will never be fixed.

[Tiggs]

the result is that both parents need to work full time to make ends meet

Agreed.

until we start to value people over profits and pay people a living wage for the work they do the rot in our country will never be fixed.

Semi-agreed. While it would undoubtedly fix the "both parents needing to work" issue, it's not something that Government will be able to really enforce, other than via upping the minimum wage, which would make Britain even more uncompetitive internationally than it already is.

Tax breaks for married couples, however, such as being able to add your partner's tax-free amount to your own, if only one of you is working - that's something they could definitely do.

[+DieChecker]

Many liberal people I know also think that everyone should go to college and pursue their Hobby, rather then an actual Career. So we have people, lots of them, taking Ancient Greek, Sociology, Art Appreciation, and what have you, as their major. Then they get out into the World and they owe 100,000 for an education that gets them 30,000 dollars a year.

everyone except the kids that is. until we start to value people over profits and pay people a living wage for the work they do the rot in our country will never be fixed.

Too many people today are overly concerned about their own comfort, even above their children, and act selfishly and childishly.

[Manananggal]

The riots were not political, they were envy and greed. You have what I want, so I will take it. If I cannot have what you have, I will destroy it. You have given me every opportunity to have what you have, but you have also given me every opportunity to not bother. You paid me to go to school and fail. You paid me to stay at home on the sofa all day and fail. You will pay for my housing, my taxes, my heating and my beer. I will repay you with spite and destruction. It is my right. I am equal to you. You cannot touch me because I have chosen to be “deprived” but I can threaten, rob and steal from you because you gave me a label that says I can have anything I damn well like.

So, the much lauded “equality” that we have built over the past 50 years is nothing more than an excuse to be feckless and lawless and have others rebuild what you have torn down in a fit of jealous rage. And it’s my fault, of course.

We have tolerated the expansion of a feral class of youth. We have celebrated “diversity” whilst they have celebrated the freedom under the auspices of “equality” to turn parts of London into gang run shooting alleys.

We have spawned an entire generation that is not educated enough to earn a living from anything other than drug dealing and crime. A dangerous generation that values “status” above morals, materialism above society and has no concept of “improvement”

WE told kids it was OK to be a gangsta. We protected them from the consequences of their actions under the banner of equality and diversity. We told them it was fine to act and behave as a lawless thugs as if challenging that behaviour would somehow offend them.

Whilst “da bruvvers” are celebrating an intake of free widescreen TVs, those who defend them by inaction against their lawlessness are preparing to complain to me that no businesses or jobs will come to the areas they trashed. And it will be my fault. Again.

None of the looters over the weekend is “trapped”. All of them make a choice, as we all do. Live your life as you see fit. If you choose drug dealing, theft and violence as a career choice, don’t you dare call me a bigot when I refuse to support your “diversity”

Here’s a plan.

You get nothing. You want it, go and get it with hard work, application, self discipline, ambition, pride and self respect. You will not get a “certificate” for trying, you will not have your bills paid by me “to get you started”. You are entitled to nothing from me. You will stand on your own two feet and take responsibility for your own life. You will not rely on the endless handouts of hardworking taxpayers, you will not beg Politicians for a bigger slice of the cake you refuse to help bake and you will not cling to the apron strings of the State whilst throwing tantrums because others might have what you do not.

Damn, that's a brilliant post!

Edited August 15, 2011 by Manananggal

[Ozner]

What they need most is humility. With humility they will either work harder to get more of what they want, or accept what they have and understand that they don't deserve everything.

[conspiracybeliever]

Nobody is forcing marriage. The government though is, quite rightly, planning on rewarding those who do marry, such as giving married couples tax breaks, as an incentive to get married.

Also, if a couple have a child I expect the woman to look after the child, feed it, change its nappies, and do the other work around the house whilst her husband is also working hard at the office, the building site or wherever he is working his butt off to make money for his family.

If the man is working hard away from home to give his wife money to spend I think it's perfectly reasonable for the wife to work hard at home looking after the baby as any responsible mother would.

The wife could also go to work and get a babysitter in to look after the baby whilst she and her husband work. However, research shows that housewives make better mothers than career women and it's also more advantageous for the child if its mother stays at home to look after it. A study by Cambridge University has found that increasing numbers of men AND women believe working mums are having a negative impact on family life. The suggestion is career and family can’t co-exist.

Apart from their mothers, children also need fathers in their lives. Having just a mother around and no father is not beneficial to a child, especially a male child, who needs not only a male role model in his life but a strong, disciplining father who scares him into behaving. Having his father as a male role model makes it less likely a boy will join a gang, and having a father who disciplines his son makes it less likely his son will break the law.

If rewarding marriage means more young men grow up with their fathers in their lives rather than just their mothers then it'll be a good thing.

And what I have repeatedly said is it's a wonderful fantasy you live in. None of what you have written is reality. The mother's I see that are staying home are not these fantasy mother's or father's you speak of. Those perfect family that I see gets rewarded for dropping kids. The more kids they drop the more welfare they get. The perfect mother sits at home and watches soap operas all day and hopefully, in some cases watches the kids and cleans the home. The perfect father goes out and works his 40 hour a week minimum wage job and comes home to a woman waiting on him hand and foot. For what reason I don't know and don't care. What I do care about is that you people are targeting working women and children to create these bull numbers. You are blaming all your problems on women who are trying to work and raise children alone. I've also said I don't believe your statistics or numbers. They do work out well for the government and companies so I can see the point to them. It is less jobs to create if a woman doesn't work and all the welfare being given to these perfect families is coming out of working people's pockets so basically working people are paying for these families to live the way they do which helps the businesses. They also work well for people who need someone to blame all their problems on.

I'm just telling you what I see from down here in 3rd world America. Maybe where you are it is that perfect Beaver Cleaver world you write about. I'm just not seeing it here and frankly I wouldn't want to live in that perfect world you describe either. If you do go right ahead. Just don't push it on me.

[itsnotoutthere]

And lets not forget or dismiss under whos watch this generation of pond life was spawned & raised. Listening to red Ed Milliband pouring scorn on a hardline approach to this problem just makes me reach for the sick bucket.

Edited August 15, 2011 by itsnotoutthere

[+DieChecker]

And lets not forget or dismiss under whos watch this generation of pond life was spawned & raised. Listening to red Ed Milliband pouring scorn on a hardline approach to this problem just makes me reach for the sick bucket.

Clinton??

Edit: Oh.. Wait... British-wise??? Not sure. Who?

Edited August 16, 2011 by DieChecker

[itsnotoutthere]

Clinton??

Edit: Oh.. Wait... British-wise??? Not sure. Who?

Clue.....socialist government with liberal leanings. Having said that, every government for the last 30 years have tilted towards a liberal approach to most things.

Edited August 16, 2011 by itsnotoutthere

[smurf0852]

Agreed.

Semi-agreed. While it would undoubtedly fix the "both parents needing to work" issue, it's not something that Government will be able to really enforce, other than via upping the minimum wage, which would make Britain even more uncompetitive internationally than it already is.

Tax breaks for married couples, however, such as being able to add your partner's tax-free amount to your own, if only one of you is working - that's something they could definitely do.

in the uk we have a system where companys making billions in profits every year pay there workforce minimum wage .the problem is this is nowhere near what a family needs to live on in our country so we have tax credits ,which are not credits at all but a benefit paid to workers which in a family setting can equal more than there wage.for example if you work less than 20 hours a week on minimum wage and have 3 kids the goverment will then pay you the same again with various "credits" .this all adds up to around 30 billion pounds a year from tax payers .if you work more than 20 hours a week it starts to drop dramaticlly to the point if you work 30 hours a week you get hardly any help at all.the point is why on earth should the tax payer pay privately employed people to make sure shareholders can stay rich.isnt that against the principles of capitalism that our great leaders claim to love .we should pay people a living wage tax them on it reduce tax on companys to maintain profit and if the present companys cant compete let someone who can take over.

[itsnotoutthere]

in the uk we have a system where companys making billions in profits every year pay there workforce minimum wage .the problem is this is nowhere near what a family needs to live on in our country so we have tax credits ,which are not credits at all but a benefit paid to workers which in a family setting can equal more than there wage.for example if you work less than 20 hours a week on minimum wage and have 3 kids the goverment will then pay you the same again with various "credits" .this all adds up to around 30 billion pounds a year from tax payers .if you work more than 20 hours a week it starts to drop dramaticlly to the point if you work 30 hours a week you get hardly any help at all.the point is why on earth should the tax payer pay privately employed people to make sure shareholders can stay rich.isnt that against the principles of capitalism that our great leaders claim to love .we should pay people a living wage tax them on it reduce tax on companys to maintain profit and if the present companys cant compete let someone who can take over.

Or alternatively, educate yourself, get a better job & whatever you do don't rely on the state to look after you.

[BackFromTheDead]

Or alternatively, educate yourself, get a better job & whatever you do don't rely on the state to look after you.

Doesnt work that way really, to improve your education costs money, and lots of it, hard to do on minimum wage (Catch 22 situation). Then there are those who cannot achieve a higher level of education for a variety of societal or medical reasons - then you have those "Educated beyond their ability" who seem to have found a natural place at the top of the economic food - chain based on...privilege and connections.

What would happen if overnight everyone Graduated as Engineers or from Med School?They would become the new Minimum Wage earners because their services would not be required.

There is no simple solution to this, provide opportunity for those capable, but never denigrate the debt our society owes to those who also perform the "menial" tasks - and never let them feel less important, because they are not!

[conspiracybeliever]

Doesnt work that way really, to improve your education costs money, and lots of it, hard to do on minimum wage (Catch 22 situation). Then there are those who cannot achieve a higher level of education for a variety of societal or medical reasons - then you have those "Educated beyond their ability" who seem to have found a natural place at the top of the economic food - chain based on...privilege and connections.

What would happen if overnight everyone Graduated as Engineers or from Med School?They would become the new Minimum Wage earners because their services would not be required.

There is no simple solution to this, provide opportunity for those capable, but never denigrate the debt our society owes to those who also perform the "menial" tasks - and never let them feel less important, because they are not!

There are always simple solutions when you don't have a problem. And it's always those people without problems that are willing to give the simple solutions to those who have the problems. Then they did their part to help.

[itsnotoutthere]

Doesnt work that way really, to improve your education costs money, and lots of it, hard to do on minimum wage (Catch 22 situation). Then there are those who cannot achieve a higher level of education for a variety of societal or medical reasons - then you have those "Educated beyond their ability" who seem to have found a natural place at the top of the economic food - chain based on...privilege and connections.

What would happen if overnight everyone Graduated as Engineers or from Med School?They would become the new Minimum Wage earners because their services would not be required.

There is no simple solution to this, provide opportunity for those capable, but never denigrate the debt our society owes to those who also perform the "menial" tasks - and never let them feel less important, because they are not!

No, you misread what i said. I said 'educate YOURSELF' don't rely on others to do it. If you have the inclination & the will, you can educate yourself. Thats what libraries & books are for.

You say 'what would happen if overnight everyone graduated as engineers or from med school'. that is the opposite of the problem we now face. There are a surfit of people leaving university with useless degrees example (and true) :-

David Beckham studies – Staffordshire University, UK

Parapsychology – various colleges

Doctorate of Philosophy in Ufology – Melbourne University

Queer Musicology – UCLA

Star Trek – Georgetown University in Washington

[BackFromTheDead]

No, you misread what i said. I said 'educate YOURSELF' don't rely on others to do it. If you have the inclination & the will, you can educate yourself. Thats what libraries & books are for.

You say 'what would happen if overnight everyone graduated as engineers or from med school'. that is the opposite of the problem we now face. There are a surfit of people leaving university with useless degrees example (and true) :-

David Beckham studies – Staffordshire University, UK

Parapsychology – various colleges

Doctorate of Philosophy in Ufology – Melbourne University

Queer Musicology – UCLA

Star Trek – Georgetown University in Washington

I took it as read that you meant for people to obtain a recognised qualification, which is the only real enabler to increasing your value in the marketplace.

I applaud anyone that uses their own resources to become more informed but most Human Resourcers would need to know at what level these studies were, how you would fit in with academic peers, and how you expect to become State Registered (in some disciplines it is a requirement)without that "bit of paper".

Whilst it is true that there are several examples of seemingly pointless areas of Academic endeavour, for the most part I cant help feeling that anyone taking "David Beckham Studies" really doesnt want to work, or has no need to find gainfull employment upon graduation.

Many problems in the Industrial world of Engineering is down to the fact that too few employees want the bother or expense of taking on a Graduate from a related discipline and providing additional training to meet their own needs. The same is true at all levels of employment - training is seldom seen as beneficial to the Company's Accountants. "Poaching" is the new "Training Scheme".

[smurf0852]

Or alternatively, educate yourself, get a better job & whatever you do don't rely on the state to look after you.

what he really means is keep letting private companys drain public money because it doesnt matter if the odd peasent works themselves to death ,you can always get a new one .just make sure the scum touch there caps as the lord passes by them in there new car as they walk 20 miles to work barefoot in winter for a loaf of bread a week.

[stevewinn]

what he really means is keep letting private companys drain public money because it doesnt matter if the odd peasent works themselves to death ,you can always get a new one .just make sure the scum touch there caps as the lord passes by them in there new car as they walk 20 miles to work barefoot in winter for a loaf of bread a week.

the government should do away with income tax on employee earnings. it was only brought in to fund the war, now here we are over a century later still being taxed. if income tax was scraped am sure it would help the economy. people would have more disposable income to spend, which creates jobs. - the people on benefits might suffer how would we fund unemployment benefit etc..

[smurf0852]

the government should do away with income tax on employee earnings. it was only brought in to fund the war, now here we are over a century later still being taxed. if income tax was scraped am sure it would help the economy. people would have more disposable income to spend, which creates jobs. - the people on benefits might suffer how would we fund unemployment benefit etc..

all tax should be VAT with higher rates on higher value items .private companys should stop expecting tax payers to fund there survival and pay workers a living wage demand would increse and the economy would grow.it really is that simple .why are we butchering vital public services like the police yet paying wages to people from tax so multinationals can keep increasing shareholder dividends year on year.is it only me that thinks this makes no sense.

[Blackwhite]

UK riots: The end of the liberals great moral delusion

The Left has gone into overdrive in its attempts to rewrite the history of the riots, but the public knows the truth.

By Janet Daley

20th Aug 2011

The Telegraph

A hooded youth walks past a burning vehicle in Hackney, east London

There is no national debate about the epidemic of riots and looting that spread through our cities like a bush fire. Out there in the real world, where people go about the normal business of life, there is no sign of the heated argument that the media is so determined to air. In fact, I cannot remember a time when there has been such crushing unanimity on a matter of public importance: the answers to the questions of why this happened, what went wrong when it began to happen and what needs to follow in its aftermath are considered so blindingly self-evident as to be beyond rational disagreement.

At the margins of this consensus, there are some distant noises off. They are the desperate cries of those who fear that they have lost the argument of a lifetime and who want to persuade the great mass of the population that what it saw before its own eyes, hour by hour, night after night on the television news channels was something else altogether.

The Left-liberal camp is in overdrive in its campaign to rewrite history (or, in its own vocabulary, to alter consciousness): you did not see thousands of jubilant thugs rampaging through the streets, destroying livelihoods and property for the sheer exultant joy of it. What you saw were societys victims responding to any or all of the following: bankers bonuses, MPs cheating on their expenses, unemployment, government spending cuts, poverty, social inequality, etc, etc. Their crimes were simply part of the same package of callous selfishness displayed by (as one particularly bizarre equation had it) tabloid phone hackers.

What is not ludicrous and insulting to common sense in these propositions is contradictory in its own terms. There are indeed views of the human condition which hold that all species of wickedness are connected, because they are all rooted in the fact that man is a fallen creature. But somehow I doubt that the ardent liberal secularists who were piping up last week were believers in original sin or the machinations of the Devil.

The moral equivalence that they wanted to establish between looters and arsonists on the one hand, and the perpetrators of any other kind of bad behaviour you can think of on the other, was rooted in ideological, not theological, orthodoxy. The rioting gangs could not simply be what they seemed what they so obviously were because that would be a devastating victory for the judgment of popular opinion over the fantasies of liberalism.

What real people know – and have known for quite a long time – is that the great tacit agreement which once held civic life together has been deliberately blown apart. There was a time within living memory when all reasonable grown-ups were considered to be on the same side. Parents, teachers, police, judges, politicians – decent citizens of every station and calling – formed an unspoken confederacy to uphold standards of behaviour within their own communities. But their shared values and expectations about human conduct were systematically undermined by a post-Sixties political ideology that preached wholesale disrespect for authority, and legitimised anti-social activity in the name of protest.

What real people saw on their television screens this fateful summer seemed to them to be the final vindication of their instinctive judgment: they may have been shocked but, on some level at least, they were not surprised that it had come to this. What else were these terrible events but the definitive disproof of a doctrine that had subverted adult authority in all its official and unofficial forms?

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/janetdaley/8713091/UK-riots-The-end-of-the-liberals-great-moral-delusion.html

Edited August 21, 2011 by Blackwhite

[Guest]

Britain is a country which has always been dominated by class politics. The ruling elite of both left and right have been through the same selective colleges and established the same cosy arrangements between the world of speculative finance and politics. This has led to over a century of industrial decline as those in power have favoured the Market and the Banking sector as ways to make quick money.

Real meaningful employment has steadily declined and there is a whole series of generations which have no prospect of gaining meaningful employment. They see the huge disparity between what they have and what the elite have, and they understand that those elites are looking out for their own interests and not theirs. These socially excluded people know that they will probably never have a job, a decent home, or the things paraded before them and that they will probably spend time behind bars at some point in their lives. So whats to lose in going out and doing a bit of looting.

We live in a fundamentally broken society where many have no prospect of meaningful involvement in a productive secure society - and people are waking up to the fact that their political representatives have deliberately made our society that way and have no intention of changing it. They realise that the rich want to blame anyone but themselves for the state the country is in.

Our rich elite should be worried as situation's like our's have historically led to many of them losing their head to a pike. It can happen again if the fundamental problems with our society are not addressed.

It doesn't have to be this way. I have just returned from Germany and none of the social tensions endemic in Britain are apparent there. This is because the Elite in Germany realise that their best interests are served by having a strong and strategically managed economy which serves the interests of the overwhelming majority of the population. They survived a 10year recession by careful planning and without any of the upheaval which Britain is currently experiencing.

Time is running out for Britain to act as a nation and not as a parasitic elite feeding off the poverty and misery of its poor.

Br Cornelius

Edited August 21, 2011 by Guest