Buchanan: The fire this time

[CID1990]

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=45460" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[AZGrizFan]

This week, it was London's turn. And when the fires burn out, we shall hear anew the old liberal litany about poverty, despair, inequality and unemployment, the excuses that long ago ceased to persuade.

For poverty existed in far greater measure in the Depression. Yet our parents and grandparents did not form mobs to burn, beat and loot.

The West is in decline because the character of its people is in decline. In Europe, Christianity is dead. The moral code it gave men to live righteously is regarded with mockery. The London riots were the work of moral barbarians with no loyalty to the people in whose midst they live and no love for the society to which they give nothing, only take.

In America, millions of fatherless young seek out in gangs the familial ties they never knew. Those gangs are now almost always formed on the basis of ethnicity or race

Douche1Bag? Are you listening?









Probably not.

[houndawg]

Awww... sounds like ol' suckerpunch needs a hug....

[D1B]

This week, it was London's turn. And when the fires burn out, we shall hear anew the old liberal litany about poverty, despair, inequality and unemployment, the excuses that long ago ceased to persuade.

For poverty existed in far greater measure in the Depression. Yet our parents and grandparents did not form mobs to burn, beat and loot.

The West is in decline because the character of its people is in decline. In Europe, Christianity is dead. The moral code it gave men to live righteously is regarded with mockery. The London riots were the work of moral barbarians with no loyalty to the people in whose midst they live and no love for the society to which they give nothing, only take.

In America, millions of fatherless young seek out in gangs the familial ties they never knew. Those gangs are now almost always formed on the basis of ethnicity or race

Douche1Bag? Are you listening?









Probably not.

Go fuck yourself. This is about capitalism, period. Marx predicted this shit eons ago.

Karl Marx (1818–1883) is best known not as a philosopher but as a revolutionary communist, whose works inspired the foundation of many communist regimes in the twentieth century. It is hard to think of many who have had as much influence in the creation of the modern world. Trained as a philosopher, Marx turned away from philosophy in his mid-twenties, towards economics and politics. However, in addition to his overtly philosophical early work, his later writings have many points of contact with contemporary philosophical debates, especially in the philosophy of history and the social sciences, and in moral and political philosophy. Historical materialism — Marx's theory of history — is centered around the idea that forms of society rise and fall as they further and then impede the development of human productive power. Marx sees the historical process as proceeding through a necessary series of modes of production, characterized by class struggle, culminating in communism. Marx's economic analysis of capitalism is based on his version of the labour theory of value, and includes the analysis of capitalist profit as the extraction of surplus value from the exploited proletariat. The analysis of history and economics come together in Marx's prediction of the inevitable economic breakdown of capitalism, to be replaced by communism. However Marx refused to speculate in detail about the nature of communism, arguing that it would arise through historical processes, and was not the realisation of a pre-determined moral ideal.

Try reading a book you moron.

[Rob Iola]

Douche1Bag? Are you listening?









Probably not.

Go fuck yourself. This is about capitalism, period. Marx predicted this shit eons ago.

Karl Marx (1818–1883) is best known not as a philosopher but as a revolutionary communist, whose works inspired the foundation of many communist regimes in the twentieth century. It is hard to think of many who have had as much influence in the creation of the modern world. Trained as a philosopher, Marx turned away from philosophy in his mid-twenties, towards economics and politics. However, in addition to his overtly philosophical early work, his later writings have many points of contact with contemporary philosophical debates, especially in the philosophy of history and the social sciences, and in moral and political philosophy. Historical materialism — Marx's theory of history — is centered around the idea that forms of society rise and fall as they further and then impede the development of human productive power. Marx sees the historical process as proceeding through a necessary series of modes of production, characterized by class struggle, culminating in communism. Marx's economic analysis of capitalism is based on his version of the labour theory of value, and includes the analysis of capitalist profit as the extraction of surplus value from the exploited proletariat. The analysis of history and economics come together in Marx's prediction of the inevitable economic breakdown of capitalism, to be replaced by communism. However Marx refused to speculate in detail about the nature of communism, arguing that it would arise through historical processes, and was not the realisation of a pre-determined moral ideal.

Try reading a book you moron.

Perhaps We The Living by Ayn Rand?

[AZGrizFan]

Douche1Bag? Are you listening?









Probably not.

Go fuck yourself. This is about capitalism, period. Marx predicted this shit eons ago.

Karl Marx (1818–1883) is best known not as a philosopher but as a revolutionary communist, whose works inspired the foundation of many communist regimes in the twentieth century. It is hard to think of many who have had as much influence in the creation of the modern world. Trained as a philosopher, Marx turned away from philosophy in his mid-twenties, towards economics and politics. However, in addition to his overtly philosophical early work, his later writings have many points of contact with contemporary philosophical debates, especially in the philosophy of history and the social sciences, and in moral and political philosophy. Historical materialism — Marx's theory of history — is centered around the idea that forms of society rise and fall as they further and then impede the development of human productive power. Marx sees the historical process as proceeding through a necessary series of modes of production, characterized by class struggle, culminating in communism. Marx's economic analysis of capitalism is based on his version of the labour theory of value, and includes the analysis of capitalist profit as the extraction of surplus value from the exploited proletariat. The analysis of history and economics come together in Marx's prediction of the inevitable economic breakdown of capitalism, to be replaced by communism. However Marx refused to speculate in detail about the nature of communism, arguing that it would arise through historical processes, and was not the realisation of a pre-determined moral ideal.

Try reading a book you moron.

Thank you for so eloquently making my point for me.

[TwinTownBisonFan]

ahh... nothing like a paleo-con bemoaning "kids these days" and citing "the good ol days" as an example... he's nothing if not predictable.

he also conveniently forgets the riots, shootings - the violence surrounding the bonus marchers, the labor violence (both pro and anti) or the farmers who blocked roads with guns and engaged in violent acts all during the depression.

of course, had he been alive back then and writing - it would have been all about how "kids these days have given up on God and, all hepped up by the indecent morality perpetuated by the talking pictures are now just a bunch of shiftless layabouts who, if they had any gumption would have a job"

[AZGrizFan]

ahh... nothing like a paleo-con bemoaning "kids these days" and citing "the good ol days" as an example... he's nothing if not predictable.

he also conveniently forgets the riots, shootings - the violence surrounding the bonus marchers, the labor violence (both pro and anti) or the farmers who blocked roads with guns and engaged in violent acts all during the depression.

of course, had he been alive back then and writing - it would have been all about how "kids these days have given up on God and, all hepped up by the indecent morality perpetuated by the talking pictures are now just a bunch of shiftless layabouts who, if they had any gumption would have a job"

Were they burning, beating and looting for no reason during the depression?

[D1B]

ahh... nothing like a paleo-con bemoaning "kids these days" and citing "the good ol days" as an example... he's nothing if not predictable.

he also conveniently forgets the riots, shootings - the violence surrounding the bonus marchers, the labor violence (both pro and anti) or the farmers who blocked roads with guns and engaged in violent acts all during the depression.

of course, had he been alive back then and writing - it would have been all about how "kids these days have given up on God and, all hepped up by the indecent morality perpetuated by the talking pictures are now just a bunch of shiftless layabouts who, if they had any gumption would have a job"

Were they burning, beating and looting for no reason during the depression?

[TwinTownBisonFan]

ahh... nothing like a paleo-con bemoaning "kids these days" and citing "the good ol days" as an example... he's nothing if not predictable.

he also conveniently forgets the riots, shootings - the violence surrounding the bonus marchers, the labor violence (both pro and anti) or the farmers who blocked roads with guns and engaged in violent acts all during the depression.

of course, had he been alive back then and writing - it would have been all about how "kids these days have given up on God and, all hepped up by the indecent morality perpetuated by the talking pictures are now just a bunch of shiftless layabouts who, if they had any gumption would have a job"

Were they burning, beating and looting for no reason during the depression?

1. notice that we really haven't had much in the way of riots or unrest in this country - despite the state of the economy... in fact, all things considered I think it's rather remarkable that we haven't seen a lot more unrest.

2. depends on what you mean by "no reason" - again, Buchanan would have chastised them 80 years ago - but instead he pretends like they didn't exist...

3. were the London riots an act of stupidity? yes. were they some kind of touchstone from which to draw a broader example about a generation? no.

[AZGrizFan]

Were they burning, beating and looting for no reason during the depression?

1. notice that we really haven't had much in the way of riots or unrest in this country - despite the state of the economy... in fact, all things considered I think it's rather remarkable that we haven't seen a lot more unrest.

2. depends on what you mean by "no reason" - again, Buchanan would have chastised them 80 years ago - but instead he pretends like they didn't exist...

3. were the London riots an act of stupidity? yes. were they some kind of touchstone from which to draw a broader example about a generation? no.

Time will tell, won't it. And I don't think it's going to take much more time, either.

[D1B]

Were they burning, beating and looting for no reason during the depression?

1. notice that we really haven't had much in the way of riots or unrest in this country - despite the state of the economy... in fact, all things considered I think it's rather remarkable that we haven't seen a lot more unrest.

2. depends on what you mean by "no reason" - again, Buchanan would have chastised them 80 years ago - but instead he pretends like they didn't exist...

3. were the London riots an act of stupidity? yes. were they some kind of touchstone from which to draw a broader example about a generation? no.

Z=

[D1B]

1. notice that we really haven't had much in the way of riots or unrest in this country - despite the state of the economy... in fact, all things considered I think it's rather remarkable that we haven't seen a lot more unrest.

2. depends on what you mean by "no reason" - again, Buchanan would have chastised them 80 years ago - but instead he pretends like they didn't exist...

3. were the London riots an act of stupidity? yes. were they some kind of touchstone from which to draw a broader example about a generation? no.

Time will tell, won't it. And I don't think it's going to take much more time, either.

Nice cop out.

[Rob Iola]

Time will tell, won't it. And I don't think it's going to take much more time, either.

Nice cop out.

Cops? No cops please...

The London riots seemed to be an extreme case of general teen angst-based stupidity - the real parallel for economy-based riots would be what's been happening in Greece...

[AZGrizFan]

Z=

Nice cop out.

Way to be a deep thinker there, Einstein. You've added so much to this thread it's truly dizzying.