Dubstepforum.com

Not at all what?

Incidentally, being sensible, I'm not going to open those links at work - I have a feeling my decisions on where to work would be made up for me if my boss happened to look across and saw articles like that rather than my normal Dubstepforum I'll take a look later on, but I'm guessing it's indirect effects of financial policy. As I've said numerous times - I strongly support tougher legislation to force banks to act correctly - if this ultimately requires full nationalisation so that they are under state control, then so be it - but I like to leave a bit of entrepreneurial drive in the economy - I think that human greed can be something useful for society as a whole - if correctly harnessed and controlled it can speed up technological progress and sharpens the imagination of goods and service providers.

The effect of the rise of global capitalism (say, since Robert Walpole's government) is really difficult to judge. It's quite arguable (which is why I have problems with the "YES MY OPINION IS DEFINITELY CORRECT" line on both sides) that overall, the people of the world are better off since capitalism - the states that have successfully industrialised (1st/2nd World) have been able to abolish an awful lot of the famine and disease that plagued them (up until the 20th Century in UK and Western Europe) and far more people are sustainable above the breadline. The UK hasn't had a civil war since capitalising it's economy - we had them or were on the verge of them *all the time* before Walpole.

Of course, the effects haven't been entirely fair and this needs ironing out... but, again, it's arguable that time and proper regulation of the redistribution of income will help solve these issues: We can see that a country like India, for so long subjugated by Imperial Britain has been able to lift itself up and up by competing in the global economy - they now have an enormous, outsourced service economy - which is absolutely brilliant (despite it competing directly with my personal interests!).

Tens of millions of people who would be living in subsistence economies are able to have a bit of the security that the globalised world offers.

Of course there are massive abuses and these need challenging and legislating against by the establishment and the people. A proper solution for Africa needs deciding on (and not at the level where we just throw cash at "Africa" as if it's one country - proper, organised plans are needed for all individual states and territories over the next century).

As for the example of Hong Kong from one of the libertarians above - you should probably remember that Hong Kong, as independent as it is, is also backed and controlled by the biggest and, arguably the most corrupt Communist state of all - it might not be your best example when extolling the virtues of ultra-capitalism! How about Singapore, instead? Singapore does well with it's free trade, as long as you don't mind living in a police state - remember, conservatives tend to be conservative all over - not just economically. Beware. Extreme Capitalism is as bad as extreme communism or, in fact, any extreme form of governance.

I do have to say one thing:

We BLATENTLY need to organise a dubstep bloc for future events.

There's about 5/6 of us on here that have spoken about attending demos. All I'm saying is soundsystem attached to bike + Mala's anti-war dub = big tingz gwanin.

Hahaha - you're on! Let's get Dubocratic!

tr0tsky wrote:I do have to say one thing:

We BLATENTLY need to organise a dubstep bloc for future events.

There's about 5/6 of us on here that have spoken about attending demos. All I'm saying is soundsystem attached to bike + Mala's anti-war dub = big tingz gwanin.

Caspa - Where's my Money?

How does that tune go?

Beatin, beatin, beatin up di babylon.

Dead Rats wrote:

tr0tsky wrote:I do have to say one thing:

We BLATENTLY need to organise a dubstep bloc for future events.

There's about 5/6 of us on here that have spoken about attending demos. All I'm saying is soundsystem attached to bike + Mala's anti-war dub = big tingz gwanin.

Caspa - Where's my Money?

Reso - If ya cant beat em.. (I actually hate those tunes though, but fitting still)

What's that tune by Matty G that goes something like "big up to all anarchist and socialist revolutionaries taking back the motherfucking streets for the world's majority through an insurrection propagated by the revolutionary working class yo!"

....oh. April 1st has gone.

tr0tsky wrote:What's that tune by Matty G that goes something like "big up to all anarchist and socialist revolutionaries taking back the motherfucking streets for the world's majority through an insurrection propagated by the revolutionary working class yo!"

....oh. April 1st has gone.

yea i was gonna post a thread on the main forum like DMZ DOUBLE PACK COMING THIS WEEK...but i 4got, waste...x

a of dkr wrote:

datura wrote: There was a study recently I think of troops in Iraq and they found that a lot of the soldiers were just shooting up in the air and not at 'enemies' as they didn't want to kill anyone.

fucking lol. So I guess the countless dead innocent ppl died because most of those bullets shot in the air somehow still hit them by mistake?
while i totally agree with generally not generalizing, i don't need to check every goddamn egg to see that the yolk is yellow. I betcha you'll find a blue one in a zillion eggs, but I think we all still agree that yolks are yellow.

So I think everyone here that's being honest to himself and others would agree that ppl enrolling nowadays in the army know exactly what they're getting themselves into and just decide that killing innocent ppl is a reasonable price to pay to get out of their money problems. scums. or they are mindless slobbering idiots believing they'll be fighting for their countries.

I said 'a lot' not 'all'. Learn to read.

And the majority of the UK army prior to 9/11 (and before the 2nd Iraq 'war') were in peace keeping and training camps, not actively engaging in battles.

Of course there are those who join with the sole intention of fighting, but a number don't. To call them all 'scum' is pretty distateful and misplaced, however you try and justify it.

It's also worth noting that during the 20th and 21st century the British Army was also involved in WW1, WW2 (ok, conscription allowing for both of those), the former Yugoslavia, Sierra Leone, Rwanda, etc etc - it can definitely not be dismissed as a purely negative organisation. It has done massively good things for the world as well as some bad things. This is not the fault of the average soldier.

On the subject of 'free' nations requiring military strength - this is shown very conveniently by the 2nd World War. Those with pacifist leanings (Belgium, Norway) but no massive financial interests (Switzerland) essentially allowed Germany to walk all over them in return for a quiet life. France rolled over because it's army hadn't been brought back up to strength after WW1 and it's populace would have rather let Paris survive than suffer bombing - it was down to Britain being organised with massive re-armament, huge weaponry works and a "death or glory" spirit that we managed to survive the Battle of Britain.

In times like this it's very easy to argue against the existance of a powerful army, but I'd sooner have one than be without... we're not out of the woods as far as global conflict goes just because we're not likely to adopt extreme politics any time soon.

Having said that I'm not saying we should use these things as an excuse to act like massive dicks. Our military power should be used to defend ourselves and our fellow Man from injustice and tryanny - it shouldn't be used to secure oil pipelines in the Middle East and it shouldn't be used as a way to stimulate economic growth. War *is* an evil (lets not have the evil conversation again!), but being prepared for it is necessary.

bwoy, i like it how you wrote half a page in a hurry to respond to something you've never read and i think it describes you and many here very well

alien pimp wrote:bwoy, i like it how you wrote half a page in a hurry to respond to something you've never read and i think it describes you and many here very well

I wasn't responding to the articles apart from where I said I hadn't read them yet. You'll know if/when I respond to them because, like when I responded last time, I'll quote and reply to them.

I'm trying to have conversations with people that want to have conversations - not those that want to write out their opinions in the worst possible English and then run away holding their hands over their ears and eyes.

Stand down, alien pimp, your time is up.

Has anyone else, apart frpm me, read that post abouot the 1984-85 miners strike that Metalbox out up in this thread. . . ? Thinking Trotsky. . Magma. . Whistla . . . ?

And this :



home | about spiked | issues | support spiked | get spiked by email

Thursday 2 April 2009
A caricature of a riot
Yesterday’s protest of poseurs against bankers confirmed that anti-capitalism itself has become an empty brand, like KFC or FCUK.
Frank Furedi



Yesterday’s anti-capitalist protest in London was a half-hearted ritual of pretend-rage and pseudo-concern. ‘Concerned of Tunbridge Wells’ was elbowed aside by ‘Angry of Brighton’ in a shallow display of second-hand militancy.

What was really striking about the G20-related demonstrations against ‘capitalism and climate chaos’ – which took place outside the Bank of England and elsewhere in London – was the extent to which the opportunistic coalition of protesting moral crusaders represented a going-through-the-motions activism; they weren’t so much representing a cause as searching for one.

Predictably, the authorities faithfully played their part in this melodrama. Exuding a profound sense of insecurity, they responded to the challenge posed by a relatively small number of demonstrators as if the protests called into question the integrity of the British state. As for the media, they were committed to providing a photo opportunity for the gritty demonstrators, who were keen to pose for the cameras as a way of advertising their sense of injustice about all the unjust stuff going on the world.

This was the kind of event that gives protest a bad name; it was a testimony to the aimless sensibilities that dominate the so-called anti-capitalist movement. True radicalism still awaits some twenty-first century content.

I am continually surprised by how often I am asked about the impending rioting and unrest that is likely to sweep across Europe. Such questions are motivated by a powerful sense of unease about the potential for social disintegration and collapse in the post-recession world.

A noisy demonstration or riot in Athens or Paris is often interpreted as the precursor to more ominous dangers to come. Officials and their expert advisers have, it seems, become wedded to worst-case scenario thinking. And officialdom feels little inhibition in displaying its crisis of nerves in public, and thus inadvertently normalising the idea that violence is the natural response of people to uncertain times.

That is why the big news story in the run-up to the G20 summit in London, which starts properly today, was the palpable sense of official insecurity surrounding it. Police and politicians continually insisted that they would not ‘take any chances’; their press releases and off-the-record communications looked like a new species of top-down rumour-mongering about the threat of mass rioting on the streets of England.

As one might expect, elite anxieties were swiftly recycled into sensationalist newspaper headlines warning people about impending riots. ‘Anarchist fears over Put People First march’ screamed one broadsheet in relation to last Saturday’s protest in London. In the event, predictions of a monster demonstration of hardened protesters were misplaced: Saturday’s demo was quite modestly sized, with head-counts ranging from 10,000 to 35,000.

Yes, one man was arrested for being drunk and disorderly – but that get-together, a precursor to yesterday’s protests, was an otherwise unremarkable, low-energy, confused event.

Yet the scare stories continued to circulate, and bankers were advised yesterday to dress down and wear ordinary street clothes, or better still to work from home, lest they became victims of the predicted ‘anarchist mob’. No such thing occurred. Even officialdom’s obsessive talking-up of a likely siege of London could not motivate many recruits for a reality TV-style protest against capitalism – a ‘reality riot’, perhaps.

One day, what is effectively a top-down invitation to riot – the advertisement of officialdom’s fears and the treatment of violence as a normal reaction to recession – is likely to turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy, but not yet.

For the time being, anti-capitalist protest looks very much like a lifestyle affectation. It has an inherently unstable character, which can one day target a rich, high-profile banker and a week later take strong exception to the building of a power station. In many respects, this form of lifestyle protest represents the mirror image of the consumerism that it so despises. Anti-capitalism has become a brand with about as much content as KFC or FCUK. This is about playing at protest.

The demonstrators were not simply demonstrating; they were posing for the cameras, and often for their own cameras. Seeing all those activists taking pictures of themselves with their mobile phones indicated to me that the line between voyeurism and protest has become ambiguous. ‘Been there, done that, smashed a window and got the picture’ – that is the attitude of the voyeur-protester. After yesterday’s protests, you can understand why, these days, instead of offering assistance some people respond to a physical fight outside a bar by compulsively recording it on their mobile phones.

Of course, there is a great deal to protest about today. But before the honourable tradition of direct action can be rehabilitated, we need some clarity about the nature of the current global crisis. That requires reflection and debate, rather than the rituals of ignorance that go under the name of ‘protest’.

Frank Furedi’s most recent book Invitation To Terror: The Expanding Empire of The Unknown is published by Continuum Press. (Buy this book from Amazon(UK).) Visit Furedi’s website here.




What the G20 should really be debating, by Rob Killick

Your guide to the ‘belly of the beast’, by Rothschild & O’Neill

Put Politics First, by Alex Hochuli

Read more at spiked issue: Anti-capitalism.




reprinted from: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php? ... icle/6422/

That's a great little piece. Very interesting thoughts and surprisingly close to my gut feelings on the day, actually... it was the vagueness of the message that made things difficult to support/join.

I haven't read the whole of the Miner's Strike article yet as it was a little bit daunting in the forum-font, but if I get a few moments over the weekend I'll give it a proper read.

The Miner's Strike is a hell of a subject to get into though, I'm not sure if it's not too big to start rolling in as a citable example in any of this - I used to argue with my A Level economics teacher about it a LOT (he was convinced that breaking the mining industry was a good thing in the long term for the country, I was far too idealistic for that).

Magma wrote:
Stand down, alien pimp, your time is up.

now imagining yourself @ american idol or what?
so now you say that wasn't adressed to me huh? strange ways to make that clear...
take the lead young jedi, you're on the rise, already the second funniest thing of my day!
but you can't beat no.1, it's oh soo... like an epiphany, but hilarious... totally omg, i guess i'll try writing about this!

PS: each time i want to cause you problems @ work it's enough to post this kind of stuff and it's gonna be worst even if you were caught with pron?

German Bank Opens Files On Financing Of Auschwitz
Deutsche Bank AG, which is negotiating to settle claims with Holocaust survivors ... because of the bank's collaboration with the izan Government.



Biggest German Bank Admits and Regrets Dealing in izan Gold





U.S. Shifts From izan Gold To Art, Land and Insurance

I'm fairly sure nobody will be very bothered about me being exposed to HTTP links unless I click on them, but it's nice to know that you're able to converse like a grown up and not letting this slip into schoolyard arguments like you could have so easil.... oh, bugger.

Also, a company's actions during the 2nd World War when they were a *nationalised institution under a izan government* doesn't really have anything to do with me deciding to work for them over 60 years later as a shareholder owned corporation, does it?

By your logic nobody should ever work for or with Germans ever again! That's just straight up xenophobia... but it's nice to see your true colours.

You're becoming hilarious!

So anyway - COULD YOU PLEASE GIVE US YOUR LOGIC ON WHY BANKING IS INHERENTLY BAD

If you can't do that, please just leave quietly so the rest of us can have a conversation like grown ups have after you've gone to bed.

who's us?
is there more people that don't know that??
i bet they are either those who can't or don't want to read (probably because they only have internet at work, you know how it is...)

I too would like to know.

kins83 wrote:I too would like to know.

+1, interesting thread and I'd like to know too purlease.