Monday 5 December 2011

WHY REFERENCE ANYTHING TO BOGUS OUTPUT OF CAMERON?

This 'politician' (a pejorative term) distinguished himself by having his public face ALTERED to a falsehood, and by conniving at a Conservative Election Flyer packed with falsehoods, and by vilifying his Coalition opposite number WITH MORE FALSEHOODS.

Spot the operative word - remember he is our Prime Minister - and Weep. But, whatever you do, do not trust, or rely on, ANYTHING that comes from such a 'politician'.

WE GOT OURSELVES ANOTHER ONE - THE PROBLEM IS US - TIME TO REDRESS

'we hear rioters tell the story of the violence in their own words.'

Can't wait.

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/fromthewebteam/2011/12/friday_2_december_2011.html?postId=111082258

I also do weddings and Bar Mizvahs.

So... Mr. Younge doing tonight's 'expert' analysis?

https://www.thecommentator.com/article/704/guardian_lse_whitewash_of_uk_summer_riots_shows_the_left_is_in_denial

RE: 2

"So... Mr. Younge doing tonight's 'expert' analysis?"

Isn't it more likely to be the recently appointed Political Editor, Allegra Stratton?

Guess which newspaper she worked for prior to joining the BBC.

MEANWHILE IN ANOTHER PART OF THE WOOD THAT WE ARE NOT OUT OF(#2)

Merkosy is mentioning the war - raising the spectre of 'confrontation' that can (of course) only be minimised by EVER GREATER UNION. Yeah right.

For EU - think PC. The dumb adherents to Political Correctness (a bully's charter) see it as IMPROVING HARMONY. When in reality, the opposite holds true: Try to make a disparate bunch 'get on' and they will fall out. Brilliant.

As almost 50% of the rioters were of foreign origin, there's not much we can do about it. They were brought up in other parts of the world, so don't stand by british norms, I would have thought that was obvious to all.

Of course policing practices are way different to other parts of the world, mainly we're too soft.

By the way these types of riots happen all over europe, many times in France, the difference being they're just not reported here, remember we have full censoreship in place.

Its all right for Merkel - she doesn't have to deal with the Guardian of the Guardian?

Illustration of how our system preys upon hapless consumer "choice" (low cognitive ability and emotionality). This is why so many are all told that everyone is equal, that it's wrong or insulting to discriminate, that it limits freedom etc. Acknowledging diversity as it is would demand regulation and its enforcement.

Freedom makes them easier to exploit i.e profit. How many people glibly say "people are smart enough to know and if they are stupid, more fool them". If people were smart enough; why would the retailers bother? If they are not smart enough, do they not deserve protection? Would one say children deserve to be ripped off because they can't count, or are very trusting? This advertising plays on the days long gone when it WAS illegal to mislead. Most people, alas, don't change with the times and don't want to believe there are predators out there. That wouldn't be nice - thinking badly of others is wrong ...........isn't it?.

I seem to recall Peter Oborne writing a good piece on the the causes of the riots at the time.

The moral decay of our society is as bad at the top as the bottom
https://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/peteroborne/100100708/the-moral-decay-of-our-society-is-as-bad-at-the-top-as-the-bottom/

5.
At 15:30 5th Dec 2011, ecolizzy wrote:

As almost 50% of the rioters were of foreign origin, there's not much we can do about it.

++
Yes - we can - we can leave EU - we can change the law - and get a good many of them deported to country of origin for restrospective application of breaching of new conditions attaching to UK nationality/temporary UK residence.
OR
We can simply wait for the next series of riots - scratch our heads & wonder why it keeps happening.
This is our country - we can either get control of it all or leave things out of control.
Clearly is just questions of political choice!

JunkkMale wrote: "'The BBC's Newsnight programme has had exclusive access to the results of the LSE-Guardian study.'"

Aside from "reasons are not causes" (a point which many university educated will have known for decades, i.e people don't always truly know why they do things, not that it matters either) - hence the low credibility of such interviews (except for the non educated), just remember the looting in Iraq where Rumsfed said that was OK, as they had not experienced "freedom" before. Or consider the Arab Spring rioting in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syria which has been actively encouraged by Libertarian Governments and spun as legitimate protest against their Governments which have policies different from ours.

"At the time Prime Minister David Cameron said the unrest had been driven by criminality and devoid of political meaning.

Many interviewees described the violence as a chance to get back at the police "This was not political protest, or a riot about politics, it was common or garden thieving, robbing and looting," Mr Cameron told the Commons."

Here's an article in the telegraph about the similarities and differences between Judaophobia and Islamophibia.

https://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/richardlandes/100121116/muslim-anti-semitism-israel-and-the-dynamics-of-self-destructive-scapegoating/

As one reads it (and the not too happy comments plus author's replies), bear this in mind, along with the often made point about scotoma, classes and quantifiers in psychological/private contexts because of this domains relative inaccessibility to the public, correcting community.

Judaism, Catholicism and Islam have ALL had very strong rules prohibiting the lending money for interest. All three groups also have their SECULAR rebels, their Non Conformists, the mark of which is some form of Libertarianism. All these Non-Conformists have done well in banking. All are treated as more successful in the Libertarian world.

All are treated as "spiritually" impoverished. Some are described as "snakes in suits". Is this mere coincidence? Why is it that privately educated children are often seen as having ben groomed/selected as "superior"? As "Chosen Ones"?

Is the solution to this "problem" to recognise that all three major religious groups have varying frequencies of the Identify Disordered in their midst, i.e those who prey upon others, and at the expense of the rest? Is the solution to acknowledge that these rebels have formed dissident groups throughout history as a function of their inability to get on within their own group? Orthodox Jews, traditional Christians (Catholics) and devout Muslims tend not to be very wealthy for a basic and easy to grasp explanation - their religion/group ethic leads them to eschew Libertarianism. Most of our incumbent politicians seem to be taking us ALL in the opposite direction, i.e towards conflict and economic excess/disaster..

2.At 14:41 5th Dec 2011, JunkkMale linked to a comment on the Guardian/LSE report which included this:

"If you’ve taught significant sections of your society over decades, regardless of the wider economic backdrop at any given time, that they have a cradle-to-the-grave social guarantee you cannot be surprised if you end up radically recalibrating their expectations about life to the point that it changes the culture.

And if social-democracy has taught people that they are literally owed a living by other people and that they have no personal responsibility whatsoever, some of them are bound to wonder why they should wait for the state to take the money out of law abiding citizens’ pockets rather than simply taking it off them directly."

As one reads this article just ask what's missing, and why BOTH those on the so-called "right" and "left" fail to ever touch upon it.

It seems it is always about what to blame with the wrongly labelled "left" seen to be blaming "environment" whilst the so-called "right" blames the individuals. But what are they actually referring to, especially the latter?

Here's the point - BOTH are blaming environment. They're both holding something vaguely "responsible" - the "right" is blaming t he "minds" of the individuals assuming they can just control their behaviour if they wanted to. But what if people are made the way they are, and they behave this way because of new circumstances and their genes and they don't know why they do it?

For instance, Hackney is just one of the poor London boroughs and it isn't the poorest either (that would be Tower Hamlets and Newham), but we didn't see hordes of Muslims on the streets did we? We didn't see this behaviour very widely across the country either. This was just a storm in a teacup in fact, useful publicity whilst bigger issues were blowing up in North Africa and across Europe. Furthermore, the underclass tends to be impoverished verbally and cognitively, so what does one expect when they're asked questions? They do badly in school for this reason. They just don't know why they do much that they do.

The problem we have are indeed the people, but they can't help much of what they do. if they could, rehabilitation, therapy and education would all work wonders but it doesn't THERE IS A LESSON HERE.

Some people are not genetically cut out for the culture which they find themselves within. Is it their fault, or the Libertarian culture's fault? Neither. It's just a population mismanagement issue. Such reports and discussions of them are a distraction form what DOES matter - namely, not enough work for the types of skills which we genetically have in our population(s), and not enough appreciation that as these skills vary geographically in subtle ways (which most people don't dare touch upon because they have no inkling how behaviour varies as a function of genes and breeding) we get different behaviours in different areas at times of distress..

It's a genes/breeding issue.

PRECISELY (#9 link)

I refer the hon gent to the post I wrote earlier (#1).

With Sopel, Paxman, Wark et al, not confronting a PRIME MINISTER with his BLATANT FALSEHOODS, we live, self evidently, under a culture of DO AS THOU WILT SHALL BE THE WHOLE OF THE LAW. This applies to riots as surely as it does to politics.

BUT BE IT KNOWN: I sent the Liar Flyer to Peter Oborn. He replied in a few neutral words, BUT DID NOT ADDRESS IT. Why? An UNLAWFULLY INSTALLED GOVERNMENT is surely news? Nuff sed.

FOR EVIL TO FLOURISH ALL THAT IS REQUIRED IS THAT GOOD MEN DO NOTHING.

#10 Oh agreed Nautonier, but I've given up on our governments, they rule, we don't, we vote for what we think will be a party keener to lower immigration, and we get even more mass immigration.

But eventually it will all come out in the wash, those same rioters will be soon be in charge anyway, we're not wanted even in our own country.

I've given up ever thinking we will get it back now, rioting is bully boy tactics, and we are pussy footing around letting them riot, with hardly any consequence.

#8 brown-dog wrote:

"Freedom makes them easier to exploit i.e profit. How many people glibly say "people are smart enough to know and if they are stupid, more fool them". If people were smart enough; why would the retailers bother? If they are not smart enough, do they not deserve protection? Would one say children deserve to be ripped off because they can't count, or are very trusting? This advertising plays on the days long gone when it WAS illegal to mislead."


HSBC fined £10m for mis-selling to pensioners
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/banking/8935361/HSBC-fined-10m-for-mis-selling-to-pensioners.html


HSBC was reported to have US $2.418 trillion (that’s $2,418 billion) worth of assets and taken US $98.918 billion (that's $98,918 million) in revenue last year.
So lets call their income last year to be a round $100,000 million. £10 million is roughly equivalent to US $15 million at todays exchange rates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hsbc

So their 'FINE' was a mere 0.015% of income. To put that into perspective it's the equivalent of someone (say a con-man) who 'earns' £50,000 p.a. (with assets of £1.2 million in the bank) receiving a £750 fine (i.e. it's really just a slap on the wrist - if that).
The FSA was ordered HSBC to repay £30 million back to its customers. The average age of those mis-sold investment products by HSBC was 83 years old. A total of £285 million was 'invested' by the bank on their behalves, of which it was estimated that 90% of those pensioners/customers were deemed to have been subject to mis-selling by the bank. I just wonder how much HSBC REALLY made out of their mis-selling (exploitation) of old people? How many of those old people will probably die before they see any of their defrauded money back?

"A new "fiscal union" to underpin the euro is the main topic that Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy will discuss at their Paris meeting. Merkel insists on amending the EU treaties to make sure that euro countries live within their means in the future. The process of treaty change will be long and arduous and, if past experience is anything to go by, may succeed only at a second or third attempt.

So are Merkel's fiscal union plans beside the point at a time when debt and interbank markets are close to meltdown? Not quite: they are a political necessity to give Merkel more room for manoeuvre at home and to allow the European Central Bank to step up its role in stabilising the eurozone."

https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/05/angela-merkel-plan-tackle-euro-crisis

"Believe it or not" this is written without any mention of the timing of the Credit Crunch and the signing of the Lisbon Treaty in 2007 (the most recent stage of the US post WWII Marshall Plan).

"Believe it or not" the author of the above article is a deputy director of "The Centre for European Reform":

"a London-based think tank which supports European integration while arguing for institutional reform of the European Union. The centre was founded in 1996 by Charles Grant, former defence editor of The Economist magazine, and is funded largely by corporate donations."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_European_Reform

As Monbiot wrote not long ago, when you see the term "Think Tank" just think TANK. These NGOs are rolling all over people.

Bown-dog wrote: "Illustration of how our system preys upon hapless consumer "choice" (low cognitive ability and emotionality)."

Omitted link to Panorama. The marketing propaganda machine has been at work for so long now that this is probably wasted effort as you can't advise consumers, only regulate the retailers and we stopped doing that in 1964.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9652000/9652944.stm

ecolizzy wrote: "As almost 50% of the rioters were of foreign origin, there's not much we can do about it. They were brought up in other parts of the world, so don't stand by british norms, I would have thought that was obvious to all."

In some parts of London, at some ages, it's more like 75% of "foreign origin". London is rapidly going that way in the North. South and East.
As said elsewhere, that's because the more able part of the indigenous population has, for a very long time, not been reproducing itself, so, it has been silent shrinking.

What the focus SHOULD be upon, is WHY that has been so for so long.

It is no good our focusing on efforts to redress the consequences, as this is a political-economic system which demands consumers as workers in order to survive and we give our politicians of all parties a mandate to keep the system running.

Too many want it both ways. It can't be done. people don't look at the bigger picture.

'14. At 16:42 5th Dec 2011, ecolizzy - rioting is bully boy tactics, and we are pussy footing around letting them riot, with hardly any consequence.'

But there is.

Just... odd ones to reconcile.

'85% cited anger'

I hear that word used, and abused, a lot, often in less than coherent explanation, if not excuse.

Another phrase of note is 'not listened to'.

And as one keen on precedent, given the degree of time, money, effort and coverage given to those who seem to err on the physical when not satisfied with the lack of response to their perceived grievances, one wonders if there are any other areas where poor mechanisms of protest can, if left long enough, or treated 'uniquely', see similar responses from those feeling disenfranchised being so readily embraced. Or at least being as quick to empathise with?

Because I am feeling a wee bit miffed. And broadcast at ('a very strong film in which we hear rioters tell the story of the violence in their own words' .. with no live counter save the microphone holder and editor's magic touch? Sounds familiar) a lot more than listened to ('We will have a big discussion off the back'. With no doubt, the usual green room suspects. A few victims may be worth hearing from, though I wonder why, unlike the aggressors, these are open to challenge. Will we get that chap who described what happened to his shop, and who 'happened' it, but was told by the microphone moppet he was in error in his testimony because it didn't suit her quaint world view or bosses editorial guidelines?

Remember you are speaking to... er.. for the nation. Apparently. That's why we get so many LSE /Guardian exclusive combos, no doubt.

I know a man who claims he once saw an MP in an NHS hospital as a patient

The 1% of the population who 'have it all' are certainly on Private Health Care and includes:

- Most if not all MP's & members of H o L
- Most if not all 'Brodie-Crat' mandarins
- A significant number of managers at the BBC
- many more public services

All paid for by the taxpayer!

Isn't it time those who spend most of their lives shouting & balling about the NHS in Parliament etc and journalists asking for resignations at the NHS dept - actually start using the NHS themselves?

Is the fact that so many that are able & so willing to choose avoid using NHS - Merely confirming what many of them them have been questioning in public - The quality and fit for purpose of the NHS?

14.
At 16:42 5th Dec 2011, ecolizzy wrote:


#10 Oh agreed Nautonier, but I've given up on our governments, they rule, we don't, we vote for what we think will be a party keener to lower immigration, and we get even more mass immigration.

++

We musn't give in - those who promote mass immigration with stories like - British people are not having enough children etc are a major part of the problem themselves - I think even the govt might be able to remedy that as would be cheaper to pay young British couples to have more children by providing them with childcare & a house & paying them for each child, until age of 18 - as would be major saving over problems associated with mass immigration & related problems. Lower population levels would mean some parts of UK would depopulate and would mean less congestion - and if govt planned properly jobseekers and British graduates etc could be incentivsied to take jobs where there labour is needed most.

We can't do this kind of advanced population planning and resource matching while immigration & population is running out of control as is creating huge problems for the future.

There are always solutions - our MP's need to look for them and block all UK immigration to absolute minimum until the situation is under control.

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16035543

Another, complementary, blog.

Thing is, again, the wrong kind of comments on the line.

Something must be done.

Maybe Paul Mason could interview Newsnight go-to gal on riots, Laurie Penney, to restore order in the Force?

Here's just one of the not-so-transparent Socialist Internationalist (i.e Social Democratic/Libertarian) Think Tanks. Observe the membership.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Council_on_Foreign_Relations.

It's the stealth, and abuse of the terms "open and transparent" which is galling.

These NGOs get their funding from where exactly?

They're hidden away as Third Sector charities and will keep re-branding no doubt, so those who are concerned about "sock-puppets", take this on board. These are not Public Sector bodies so one must ask who can regulate them given that The Charities Commission can't possibly cope with their proliferation and the FOIA doesn't apply..

This is "spread spectrum" Libertarian politics so be warned when they say they are "independent". Independent of what exactly?. .

A couple of articles from Monbiot on these devices of opacity.

https://www.monbiot.com/2011/09/12/think-of-a-tank/
https://www.monbiot.com/2011/10/17/show-me-the-money/

nautonier wrote "those who promote mass immigration with stories like - British people are not having enough children etc are a major part of the problem themselves - I think even the govt might be able to remedy that as would be cheaper to pay young British couples to have more children by providing them with childcare & a house & paying them for each child, until age of 18 - as would be major saving over problems associated with mass immigration & related problems."

You forgot t o begin with I THINK.

The fact is that ALL Libertarian economies, across the WHOLE of Europe, which now includes Russia, as well as Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea in the Far East ALL have this problem. Singapore tried every trick in the book since the 1960s in an effort to reverse this and it has failed.

THIS IS A MAJOR PROBLEM FACING LIBERTARIAN ECONOMIES.

You are describing what you DON'T know, so I advise you to go and look it up yourself. It is THE major driver of our economic problems which actually date back to at least the 1930s when the data first became collectable in the UK (it was available on the Continent before). One of the reasons why the problem persists is because so many people don't pick up on what they're told about (because they're lured by short-term rewards), and some even campaigned for war AGAINST those who were trying to fix it back in the 1930s by more regulation. This is why authority is so out of fashion on our culture, opinion is encouraged and most recently, radical Shia Islam has been painted black (terrorist).

JunkkMale wrote: "Thing is, again, the wrong kind of comments on the line. Something must be done.

Maybe Paul Mason could interview Newsnight go-to gal on riots, Laurie Penney, to restore order in the Force?"

Indeed, if it isn't an "authority" (like David Cameron) telling us what's the case as he's just thought it up as "a leader" (the "free-world type which doesn't believe in Government, despotism or dictatorship at home and regime-changes them abroad) or some journalist telling us about a "fascinating" report he's read, it's someone on Newsnight who looks like they should still be in school giving his or her ill-informed but ever so confidently held opinion.

What one will almost never hear is anyone explaining how it's genetically emitted behaviour which changes in rate depending on the prevailing (i.e reinforcing) conditions. That's because most people in this deluded system won't hear anything said about biological determinism having been brainwashed by PLASTIC to think they can achieve anything so long as they just wish and try hard enough (like Peter Pan).

Those who challenge these ultimately destructive myths will be booed from the gallery for spoiling children's fairy tales (which pretty much describes how these predators get so rich). I'm surprised they don't try to sue scientists and regulators for loss of earnings..

so what are we to do? The right wing of the Tory party are sharpening their knives for Dave if he departs from the written script on the EU, if we do leave we will be left at the mercy of a rampant, foaming in the mouth Bill Cash type government that will trample on workers rights, pay awards and union recognition but we can have our bent bananas back so we will have none of the 'protection' other EU memebers have and all of the 'uncertainty' talk about a rock and a hard place....

I read the intro and got to:

'However, a major study by the London School of Economics and the Guardian newspaper...'

...and I stopped reading. I then fell about laughing. OK, both the above may have street cred in the BBC News department and a jail cell in Libya but.... seriously Newnsight? SERIOUSLY!?

The people rioting in London for iphones and £200 trainers do not have a clue about real poverty - the LSE and the Grundian should try visiting the Merthyr and other Welsh Valleys. Hang on, Newsnight should even take a drive up them and do some investigating of real poverty.

There you will find terrible poverty, a lack of hope but, strangely enough, a complete lack of rioting!

24.
At 19:43 5th Dec 2011, brown-dog wrote:

You forgot t o begin with I THINK.
++

and you forgot to add (repeated offence) - "in my opinion".

Do you know what those that who say everyone else is wrong but themselves are called?

Try looking it up on Wiki?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8935842/Silly-me-I-didnt-realise-the-rioters-were-victims.html

#21 Oh I'm afraid I have given up nautonier, we are silenced if we say a word out of place, even if it's the truth. I did as others did on this blog, and voted radical, but that has no affect, especially when ballot papers are sent out of the country, probably duplicted several times, and then sent back to our elections.

I've learnt not to believe or trust any politician, and journalists are fast going the same way, the bloggasphere may be peopled by a random bunch but they seem more in touch with the real world! ; )

26. At 20:29 5th Dec 2011, stevie wrote:

so what are we to do? The right wing of the Tory party are sharpening their knives for Dave if he departs from the written script on the EU,

++

What written script? There is no such thing - These are unchartered waters.
Those who have criticised DC have been proved wrong by events as his patient approach has most probably been correct - particularly with the Lib Dum millstone around his neck.
The likelihood is that there will be both EZ & non-EZ countries who will not like the small-print of the Franco-German fudge that is emerging as they realise that austerity on terms that suit Germany will sentence their own economies to years & years of stagnation as the stringent Golden Rule takes away all prospect of flexibility in running their own economies.

The likelihood is that then UK will get a once in a lifetime opportunity in the next 12 months to repatriate powers from Brussels - the important thing is to be ready & know when & what it is that UK needs to demand.

I would say this si minimum of what UK needs to demand AND secure-

1) opt out on EU immigration like Republic Of Eire
2) opt out on EU HRA
3) option for UK to apply its own strategic version of a Tobin Tax
4) much much better consultation/ democratic process from EU
5) insist on full & transparent EU accounts
6) scrap swathes of EU regulation & red tape
etc

Britain can do well here if we keep cool heads & knock that EU cockerel off its perch & rid that straightjacket.

After that it is purely semantic as to whether UK is in or out of EU/EZ as a major repatriation of powers will have been achieved.

DC must not get cornered as a europhile or europhobe - he is proving that he is neither, as the situation is far from being that simple.

#21 Oh I'm afraid I have given up nautonier, we are silenced if we say a word out of place, even if it's the truth.

++
We musn't give up - the enemies of ordinary British people are everywhere like snakes in the grass - we have to keep at it - get right under their skin - they don't like it up them!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gon2WoLKMvI

Of general interest - "Narcissist's Cognitive Deficits"

nautonier wrote: "We musn't give up - the enemies of ordinary British people are everywhere like snakes in the grass - we have to keep at it - get right under their skin - they don't like it up them!"

It really can be very difficult to see who the good and bad guys and gals are. That's the problem. Many who campaign truly believing that they're doing good often don't, hence the saying that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

For example, if we didn't have immigration, it is said that many more of our schools would have had to have closed due to falling rolls, making many teachers unemployed.

Elsewhere costs of labour would have increased (as during the Black Death when Europe's population almost halved) due to lack of supply, making the cost of goods rise...and so on. These parameters have not gone unexamined. It's often a case of the lesser of two evils.

The root driver is the below-replacement birth-rates.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VXdW6KlwCM&feature=related

"Narcissist or Psycopath? What are the Differences"

Now I can really tune in to 'Top Gear' & enjoy!

Are the rioters narcissists or psychopaths?

Politicians?

Oh .... no .... BANKERS!

THE STUNT-MAN OLYMPICS

Note the expensive Olympic stunt Dave has just pulled, in the interest of 'legacy' (self-aggrandisement) and then note his words regarding current EU goings-on:

"As Prime Minister, I'm NOT INTENDING (weasel words) to pass any powers to the EU." A Tonyesque whiff of presumed (usurped?) feudal power there?

Note to Dave: in a democracy, YOU don't get to give anything of OURS away - it goes before Parliament (where - like Putin - you have been rumbled).

My post #1 is very relevant.

WE GOT OURSELVES ANOTHER ONE - TIME TO ACT

Now lets see, this er report was compliled by the Lse and the Grauniad..and your giving it air time????..Are you serious

I have been a police officer for 15 years and have never seen anyone assaulted by fellow officers and would be horrified if I had. I do have to stop and search people on occasion but not without justifiable reason. This is the rioters making excuses for their own lawless behaviour.

This riot discussion is tedious - no, it is dire. Who invited these people on? More importantly, who thought that this story was worthy of so much airtime? The rest of the country is not interested in this. Knitted booties stolen!? Shock! Horror!

Turn on Fivelive where they are discussing the real story - the Euro crisis and the downgrade threat to 17 EU countries.

Someone needs to kick the NN Editor up the backside for this tedium tonight - most of your audience must have switched off. I will catch Paul Mason on iplayer tomorrow - but by then his news will be out of date.

Beware academic analysis: (because it tends to live in a bubble..or wrapped in cotton wool or lives down the bottom of the garden found amongst the fairies)

The Gospel according to the Guardian newspaper and the BBC newsnighty folk with the help of 200+ summer rioters filling out a questionnaire

"Its society's fault and the police don't respect me...init"

I can't believe you had the nerve to trot out this garbage and dress it up as a serious report with guests. Newsnight has reached deep into the vault of its own madness and pulled out a handful of utter bilge...and I watched it!

I expect this kinda reporting from the self-hating Liberal hacks at the Guardian but bejesus...newsnight...what have you done !?!

NN...good luck with any redemption that you undertake. Your gonna need it.

'85% cited anger at policing practices as a key factor in why the violence happened.'
No matter what is argued on News night or political forums anywhere, no one will actually agree. In a topic like the London Riots, and many others it is very easy to generalize, and I believe the panelists today are doing this in vast amounts. In my own opinion, people who were involved in the riots were most particularly not affected by the police but have used this as an excuse following the negativity that ensued. You cannot say that these facts or statistics are valid at all because there was near 4000 + rioters and only 270 were actually interviewed, it hardly suggests 'otherwise' to the views of government. It merely shows a minority part of the the rioters that were either brave enough or been forced to by parents, to allow themselves be interviewed. If I was a rioter - which I most certainly wasn't - I would then try to save my own back by placing the blame on anything but myself, to show that I wasn't someone who just got on the bandwagon of the London rioters because they were a 'phase' that was deemed 'cool' or that I was guaranteed 'some new gear'. I know, I am now generalizing but there is nothing else you can do in this situation. All of the panelists merely wanted to highlight there cause and can not speak on behalf on the rioters, nor no the reasons for the violence. However, there is not doubt in my opinion that these rioters were not rioters but merely wanted 'something to do'.

Well said kevseywevsey - I think Paxman should issue a full apology at the top of tomorrow night's programme on behalf of NN for tonight's tripe.

I actually watched and listened to that rubbish. NN has plumbed new depths tonight.

Thank goodness I had Fivelive on also and was able to listen to the Euro crisis news as it is developing.

Tonight's NN was an insult to every decent unemployed person in this country who, although in a dire state re work, finances and hope, do not riot, do not rob and do not have the luxury of whinging on the BBC - not that they would, as they no doubt have too much self-respect!

#41 Oh Kev you brave man, I heard Jez say his little bit to camera, and I thought I can't listen to this codswallop and turned off. I thought my link at #29 had a much better ring to rioting.

I had a very deprived childhood, but an honest one, you don't need money to know how to behave.

:o( I'm afraid even I found the report on the riots to be the cure for insomnia tonight... Agreed fully with the Minister for Criminal Justice who pointed out that 75% of the rioters had one or more previous convictions.....My sympathies to Ms Pilgrim and all the other innocent people whose lives have been ruined.
I soon woke up at Paul's report, and more so with Bo-Jo's brother being interviewed by Jeremy :o)

I AM GOING TO REGRET THIS POST

I feel compelled to report that I was viscerally angry as a boy, and young man. But I was moderated by a fear of retribution, hence managed to make a life.

Is it not an established fact that a group will behave in a more extreme way than an individual? I was never so tested.

May I - very tentatively - suggest that if you have never been a viscerally angry male, then you will not understand how nihilistic, mindless, self-destructive, it can be. However: we all accept that anorexia and bulimia (mostly in females) is to be 'addressed', not punished. Might destruction and looting (and some other manifestations) be a male expression of a parallel CONFUSION of the mind?

My personal misery led me to seek understanding before retribution.

Genuine apologies to all offended by these words.

barriesingleton wrote: "I feel compelled to report that I was viscerally angry as a boy, and young man. But I was moderated by a fear of retribution, hence managed to make a life."

Lots of young males (and a much smaller proportion of females) behave this way to a degree when young, most mature out of it.

What we saw on camera (and discussed in the studio) was classic Anti Social Personality Disorder (one of the four Axis II Cluster Bs). It is almost co-extensive with repeat offending .It is what the Criminal Justice System has to deal with (no treatment programmes work).

Whether people like it or not you will find polices and research from all over the world saying that Black males are more at risk. It is a male risk more than female. It's just a statistical fact. All four Axis II Cluster B disorders share SOME features in common. Normal people have some of these qualities too. That is why it is so difficult to explain.

Think continua or poles. That's the way DSM-V is going. These disorders are a major social problem now. Drugs, alcohol, family relationships.

They spell trouble. Most people with these problems don't see themselves as having a problem - they see others as having the problem!. This surprises most people when they first encounter it.

I have said a number of times we are breeding more of these people. It shows up in the crime rate and size of prison population, and our schools and communities now we don't lock so many up.

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0183lcd/Newsnight_05_12_2011/

Mr. Paxman really read this intro script out straight faced?

'Ground-breaking, intensive research'. 'Deep politics'.

Then the piece, from 'Our' researchers, as 'reported' by Paul Lewis, of the Guardian (not creditted as such on screen, why the blur BBC?) on behalf of the BBC?

With special insights from spliff-partying, car-torching, great, excited, injustice-aware Alex from Sarf London sounding more like he was from Glasgow than any Tottenham, innocent-Dugganesque affiliation suggested.

All to a music bed like a bad 70's corporate video. Meanwhile...

'JunkkMale has not very exclusive access to the results of some other stuff, on top of that shared by ecolizzy above, the rarest of its kind (on the BBC), and hence we have a very strong alternative set of opinions in which we hear other parts of the UK pontificating on the story of the violence in their own words.'

https://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/neilobrien1/100121632/how-the-guardian-destroyed-the-lefts-excuses-for-the-riots/

Could be worse; could be ... the Daily Mail! But then, one doesn't see exclusive combos with such publications around here much to gather there may be other ways of looking at stuff. Not saying I necessarily agree with all the authors or commenters write, but they do represent alternative points of consideration to that shared in an objective, balanced way in certain other quarters.

I also note one of the guest panellists was a Ms. Pilgrim.

On causes, quite moderate, and mainly unhappy with the police. What she thinks has gone wrong with society is... there isn't an answer, but people feel they have no future, or hope... and 'we're all to blame'.

Was she this one?

https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/10/uk-riots-vigilantism-big-society

'On closer inspection, people are furious: one of the women with a broom had made herself a vest that said "looters are scum"; Liz Pilgrim, an Ealing businesswoman, called the rioters "feral rats" on the BBC.'

Post-Clarkson/One Show, the BBC's PC-monitors had a 'word' in her shell like, did they?

In that piece I also note reference to the Today programme, seemingly less thrilled at what it calls vigilantism by groups they don't approve of.

If you live in an echo chamber, you will only hear what you utter. Between the Graun and the BBC, you merely get it in stereo.

Hard to feel well represented, much less educated or informed, on such a basis.

Especially by a national broadcaster that seems keener on spinning up heat with such pathetic excuses for and delusions of illumination, giving propaganda trophy big-ups to 'disrespec-obsessed, entitlement-addicted thugs. Plus few who seemed that likely to be major EMA candidates.

Loved the line 'rioters felt the police did not treat them as equals'. Uh-huh. Equal to who... the non-rioting public?

'Wouldn't it be better to wait for the facts..' intones an inflammatory, interrupting, reality-deluded Mr. Paxman, according this high-care 'research' am abolustist heft that it may not yet warrant.

Yes, probably. But then, whose 'facts' are you referring to?

Pathetic, BBC, pathetic.

HHhmmmm Mr Dog, one for you, you often say families are falling apart, and it's ruining the country!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070407/Death-traditional-family-Experts-say-live-alternative-family-forms.html

36. At 22:15 5th Dec 2011, nautonier wrote:

For what its worth - apparently, there is a strand of thought that narcissists and/or psychopaths are far more more common than we realise & a huge problem, in many ways.

This can explain the behaviour of common day occurrences such as e.g. bad driving/road rage, politicians with bulging eyes, bloggers who hi-jack blogs explaining how everyone else has it wrong but themselves, greedy bankers salivating over bonuses, vulture auction house buyers watching debtors turned out of their houses as unable to pay their mortgages, politicians who spend years screaming about NHS services and yet use private health care to be pampered themselves.

This isn't quite Monty Pythons - but Spotting the Narcissist/Pscycopaths can be useful as their are deep underlying issues to these problems & I do resent the way that these kind of rioter character assassinations are attributed by some nasty poeple - as the same underlying charactersistics of mental illness can manifest themselves in different ways amongst those that are 'better off'/on higher incomes & in senior positions of authority/responsibility.

Narcissists and/or psycopathy is/are probably more common that most realise - and IMO it is important to realise this; as leaving these conditions untreated is probably very damaging and expensive - a colossal overall price tag here to ignoring these problems.

Spoilt Toy Boy 'Top Gear' programme is a good example of an extremely irresponsible programme feeding the worst kind of self indulgent narcissism and inducing some to go out on the Queen's highway breaking speed limits as some think they are somehow a special case & superior - & need to drive like idiots - whenever & wherever they think they can get away with it.

A bit too 'cognitive' for the BBC-Guardian - as would offend the 'human rights' of some, no doubt?

Again, all IMO, as 'narcissist free' commentary.

"PATHETIC BBC" - EDGY PAXMAN (#48)

"There is NO EXCUSE" repeated ivory-tower Paxman to his victims, inviting them to vilify (why not, Dave has set the bar high) a cohort of whom THEY KNOW NOTHING. All credit to the lady whose shop was destroyed, and to Lammy, that the 'Paxman authority' - wasn't.

As for NewsyNighty: gravitas absent - NO EXCUSE.

Katie_reason quoted "'85% cited anger at policing practices as a key factor in why the violence happened.' and then wrote" No matter what is argued on News night or political forums anywhere, no one will actually agree. In a topic like the London Riots, and many others it is very easy to generalize"

People should be wary of anything they see from the media which begins with statements to the effect that it is groundbreaking, rigorous, research etc as it means that no doubt it isn't. One certainly doesn't put much store by what perpetrators or victim have to say, any more than one asks people experiencing a typhus epidemic in wartime why they are ill, as they won't know and won't have the education to be informative.

Think late WWII for a classic example, how many knew what the vector of typhus was and how it has to be dealt with?

There is an incredible arrogance in our media (and in some soft social sciences). They seem to conveniently think that people have the accurate ability to explain their behaviour and that of others even though a quick look at their academic and employment record would tell them quite the opposite.

This is all part of the Libertarian myth, i.e that everyone is equal, "elitism" (ie expert analysis is unnecessary, and that counts of everyone's opinion is what counts. This anarchism accelerated under Blair's Government, which is hardly surprising given its agendas, but the media is still peddling this, as if its survival now depends upon it (e.g. for advertising). Newsnight and the BBC is not free of this, by any means.

Surveys of public opinion are not reliable as the public is rarely reliably informed about these matters, they learned their language, and some not so well. They are over-confident about their abilities precisely because they lack the ability and education to be more self-critical. Poorly educated/educable people do not readily discriminate between what they think and what's the case based on evidence because they neglect the latter due to their lack of ability/education.

AFTER CENTURIES, WESTMINSTER GOVERNANCE APOLOGISED FOR SLAVERY

Might a logical deduction be that dynastic governance BEARS SOME RESPONSIBILITY for what was done IN ITS NAME in earlier times?

LET'S JUST TAKE SCHOOLING - BELOVED OF GOVERNANCE

I assert that SCHOOL is a distillery of a MASH of humanity. Out the top comes SPIRIT (albeit institutionalised and weird) but out of the 'bottom' comes SLUDGE - SLUDGE - SLUDGE.

What the accrues? "The proof is left to the pupil."

AND THERE'S MORE

Gove – SEE ME!

if you can stand it

tony talks about faith and liberal democracy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8x4Mi8f4GFo&feature=g-all

"LACK THE ABILITY . . . TO BE MORE SELF CRITICAL (#52)

Nuff sed

ecolizzy wrote: "HHhmmmm Mr Dog, one for you, you often say families are falling apart, and it's ruining the country!"

I suggest you critically look into what Germany was grappling with in the 1920s, It wasn't innocent Jewish people as a religious group who were the target, it was "Left-Communism", which Lenin had written so critically of in his paper "Infantile Disorder". These were undermining the status quo (a fledgling democracy at the time). The authoritarian back-lash was inevitable as people saw everything breaking down, that authoritarianism was just governance - regulation. Russia reacted the same way internally to such subversives in the late 1920s and 1930s.
These "Social Democrats" or Trotskyites wanted the same thing that Blair and many Libertarians across Europe and the USA wanted, but Governance does not work without a strong state as it is what "governance" means.

Look at hackney and many other inner city areas to see the consequences of the alternative in terms of licensing "entitlement" - the end you will get what Germany got..

If you look up a paper by Stalin in 1936 "Mastering Bolshevism" you'll see parts of it reads like Harold Wilson or Neil Kinnock grappling with the Labour party in the 60s, 70s and 80s. That is because the British and Russian Labour Party was infiltrated. Which major power is anti statist?

Where are the Credit Ratings of sovereign debt in Europe emanating from?

junkmale@ 48:

After reading your link to the Telegraph I came across this comment:

"Nothing makes a leftist more angry that to be proved wrong in his or its suppositions by his or its own research. Never thought I would find any good in the Guardian except as a daily liner for my parrot's cage. (I am not joking. It provides a modicum of pleasure to watch my bird s++++++ on the front page of that British version of the old USSR newspaper Pravda"

:o)

TONY NEVER MASTERED LOGIC (#54)

Religion started with rocks and trees. Successive power-needy MEN upped the ante to just ONE GOD. After that, the only place to go was to ANNEXE THE SON OF THAT GOD, AS FOUNDER OF YOUR RELIGION. Game set and match.

Tony (and many more) fail to realise that Christianity TRUMPS ALL OTHER FAITHS. Ergo: multifaith respect, and "interfaith" adherence, are blasphemies.

But then: Tony is a "PRETTY STRAIGHT KIND'A GUY". His period in office stands testimony.

Nautonier wrote "Narcissists and/or psycopathy is/are probably more common that most realise - and IMO it is important to realise this; as leaving these conditions untreated is probably very damaging and expensive - a colossal overall price tag here to ignoring these problems."

To diagnose these behaviours one has to be a professional. Psychopathy is not in DSM-IV for a reason. What is that?

There are no effective treatments for these disorders and that's why they are such a problem.

You persist in writing in a manner which generally presumes that there are quick fixes to problems, and that someone should implement those fixes. The truth is that there are some behavioural (as with medical) problems which are part of human genetic diversity, and which can not be "treated", just as there are some defining features of political-economic systems which can not be changed without changing the entire political-economic system. Libertarianism means non-governance - it promotes the acceptance of diversity/choice. If one calls for governance in a Libertarian democracy one is likely to get MORE measures which make governance harder, if one persists one may even be branded a nazi.

This is why some of what you have been posting has been criticised as naive - un-informed. Incorrigible etc.

That these Identity Disorders are genetic and that they may be increasing in population frequency, is indeed a major concern. Just remember how you learned about this.

50. At 10:10 6th Dec 2011,
continued

See what I mean - narcissism &/or psycopathy is prevalent & those who have these conditions rarely receive what if any treatment is available & so their behaviour gets worse & worse?

The next part about some of those having these disorders is to recognise some evidence of their behaviour:

1) identifying mysterious 'predators' and at the same time promoting mass UK immigration even though it is damaging to millions of British workers & their families in terms of their incomes & opportunities

2) defending the damage being done to British families as if in some way they are inferior or deserve this kind of treatment by their govt & institutions and that other arbitary factors underlie why no one will manage UK immigration properly.

But anyway, their delusion is that it is the 'predators' and poor British families that are the problem and not their own prejudice & illness

kevseywevsey wrote: "After reading your link to the Telegraph I came across this comment:

"Nothing makes a leftist more angry that to be proved wrong in his or its suppositions by his or its own research. Never thought I would find any good in the Guardian except as a daily liner for my parrot's cage. (I am not joking. It provides a modicum of pleasure to watch my bird s++++++ on the front page of that British version of the old USSR newspaper Pravda"

But it's just more subterfuge by the right wing (Libertarian) media. The Guardian is not Left Wing. To see a left wing paper see China Daily.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Daily

As we don't have a Left Wing press. It's all Libertarain-left, Libertarian-right etc, and as Newsnight and many others have recently acknowledged, we are basically presented with sham arguments about policy and sham choices with our vanity being flattered that we can discern a difference which actually matters. We effectively live in a one party Libertarian state where opinion is common precisely because it doesn't matter. Meanwhile, the state is slowly being eaten away at all our cost, and many don't see how they are helping that come about.

HE DOW OLYMPICS - IS IT ME?

This Dow spat suddenly woke me to just how far we have come from the simple Olympic ideal.

AGE OF PERVERSITY

Think about some of the popular game shows where a group of celebrities train to perform something (allegedly outside their normal repertoire - it isn't always the case of course, most actors learn dance etc). But note the odd audience responses to judges when they are critical. Even if the judges are accurate, the audience will sometimes boo them. Why is that? Answer populism. If some in the audience like a competitor, merit may go out of the window, At that point one should ask whether populism is rational or fair. When the likes of Simon Cowell are interviewed on programmes like Newsnight seriously asserting that Government could partly be done this way, one should really begin to worry.

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/8412617.stm

THAT'S LIBERTARIANISM FOLKS.

This has an insidious agenda which has ben working, as it did for Trotsky and the Left-Communists (e.g. Rosa Luxemburg, Tony Blair etc) for a while.

Beware of politicians bearing populism as most people are not very good at making choices in their longer term best interests (see debt, drugs-abuse, marital breakdown, alcoholism, crime etc).

My sample definition/example of a 'modern psychological nazi'

One who is in favour of and by their actions & decisions push millions & millions of immigrants on a vulnerable host population in a middle of an economic depression as some kind of racial fabric experiment and as irrespective of the opinions of that the host population & as supporting a political voting & system of governance that denies their voice being heard. This includes those who do not even recognise the problem or abdicate their responsibilities.

Would be difficult/impossible to separate the narcissim & psycopathy of the 'modern nazis' from all of that as this manifests itself in the corporate world & also in politics with e.g. preference for foreign workers, writing off British people because of address, accent, qualifications etc., outsourcing of British jobs overseas, etc etc.

Part of the profile of the 'modern corporate nazi'

Modern complex psychological nazis - some seek to blame mysterious 'predators'
Modern complex political nazis
Modern complex corporate nazis
Modern complex media nazis

Others:-
Modern Complex Eurocrat Nazis

This is real - & they're now running the UK as incorporates a huge swathe of our political class.

The key indicators are:

- the complexity of their defensive message

- clear lack of empathy for their victims & recognition of the damage in the outcomes of what they do

- unequal distribution of the outcomes of their policies e.g. against English working class

It is what people do that matters & not just what they say.

Nautonier wrote:"See what I mean - narcissism &/or psycopathy is prevalent & those who have these conditions rarely receive what if any treatment is available & so their behaviour gets worse & worse?"


There IS no effective treatment available. This is largely genetic.
Those who HAVE to deal with these individuals (usually to classify them
forensically) tend to loathe the encounters, as they can't do much if anything with them and the individuals lack genuine insight. That's a good part of the problem. One can't get through to them. One of the clips you provided was a classic case (i.e the uploader is one of them and even says so elsewhere). It is usually other people (like the Criminal Justice System or their families) who are responsible for these people ever coming to the attention of professionals This is not about name calling. It is about people who have Identity Disorders. They confuse who they are with others in a way which makes them unreachable and thus largely socially unteachable. They are criminogenic, and/or venal. "The Evil Ones".

"The next part about some of those having these disorders is to recognise some evidence of their behaviour:"

Which, as already stated, requires professional training as it's observation of behaviours and peer norm based. Most people can't do it reliably as a consequence.

PS. "Psychopathy" is spelled thus.

"THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN RIGHT OUT OF PARTY POLITICS" (Daily Politics)

Is this utterance the last refuge of the scoundrel politician? It is said repeatedly with reference to a range of issues (never war or financial collapse, of course).

But who can defend the opposite - whatever the issue? The contentment and prosperity of INDIVIDUAL Britons (not the Globopoly Swank Factor of UK) should be priority to our managers, but Dave (and predecessors) is aobut Dave, and the legacy of Dave.

See what I mean - be wary of those who profess knowledge they don't have as a 'Freudian fraud'.

Eugenics has no basis as there being no reliable evidence for its application or analysis. That is why it is shunned by almost the entire global medical & scientific fraternity as being plain nasty.

Be very wary of those pushing eugenic theories as to eg why classes of host British and immigrants alike are to be branded in some way, as being inferior. This gives away their possible narcissistic/psychopathic tendency.

Eugenics is "nonsense for the nasty"!

IF ONLY THE 'SEND' BUTTON WERE NOT SO CLOSE TO THE 'SCROLL' BUTTON

#66 as intended:

"THIS SHOULD BE TAKEN RIGHT OUT OF PARTY POLITICS" (Daily Politics)

Is this utterance the last refuge of the scoundrel politician? It is said repeatedly with reference to a range of issues (never war or financial collapse, of course).

But who can defend the opposite - whatever the issue? The contentment and prosperity of INDIVIDUAL Britons (not the Globopoly Swank-Factor of UK) should be priority to our managers, but Dave (and predecessors) is about 'Dave, and the legacy of Dave'.

Can anyone state an issue that would be better resolved by a bunch of Westminster Creatures, under the party-political ethos, as compared to being tackled by mature individuals, with one joint aim: to serve the interests of the people?

SPOILPARTYGAMES - INSTALL INTEGRITY

"It had something of the flavour of the Putney debates of 1647. For the first time in decades – and all credit to the Corporation officials for turning up – financial power was obliged to answer directly to the people.

It felt like history being made. The undeserving rich are now in the frame, and the rest of us want our money back."

Monbiot 7th November 2011) recently promoting a meme now doing the rounds.
https://www.monbiot.com/2011/11/07/the-self-attribution-fallacy/

Alas, talk is cheap as what we have is a major slow-burning demographic problem which most are unaware as a consequences of decades of obfuscating propaganda, and, given that this problem occupied some of the best brains in the world for decades, quick-fix knee-jerk solutions from those unfamiliar with the history are unlikely (though not to be ruled out as possible) to be of help, they'll just be a distraction..

My advice:- use cues to learn about the history before suggesting solutions. Increase the awareness of others of this history. Look to how China is dealing with it. Don't panic. Stay objective.

51. At 10:27 6th Dec 2011, barriesingleton

I agree that Mr. Lammy seemed about the only one trying to navigate the 3-ring circus he was being led around by Mr. Paxman with some sense and dignity.

57. At 10:58 6th Dec 2011, kevseywevsey

I try and avoid 'isms, 'ists 'zis etc as a) never too sure I have the definitions sorted, b) those who do use them are too clear either and c) because they hark back to earlier eras and really don't apply as intended these days, far as I can gather.

Hence seeking balance in casting my net broad in hope of something approaching accuracy and even truth in amongst the resultant cornucopia of opinion that too often is shared, often on a selective and/or editted basis, as 'fact'.

And always cranking an eyebrow at the slant adopted on this basis if the focus appears very narrow.

Still for every Guardian piece or LSE report the BBC sees fit to share... exclusively... and with little other input, to 60M viewers, I offer these to the few score in balance who frequent these pages:

https://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/11869

And as 3rd party reports are all en vogue (well, depending of the reputation of source, as Saif Gaddafi will doubtless attest), one can presume this will be wall to wall by week's end?:

https://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2011/12/5/gwpf-report-on-bbc.html

However, in a 24:60,000,000 basis, in shaping public opinion I do have to concede that this is hard to see as likely to be much by way of balance. Which must be what makes it all so 'unique'.

nautonier wrote: "Eugenics has no basis as there being no reliable evidence for its application or analysis. That is why it is shunned by almost the entire global medical & scientific fraternity as being plain nasty."

Eugenics ("good breeding") was a term coined and in vogue before molecular genetics (cytology) and demography (quantitative genetics) fully became established. By the 1940s, focus shifted to genetic counselling, demography and actuarial analysis (insurance).

Today, most people see this at work in terms of Rating Agencies Risk Assessments and Risk Management via "the markets" i.e. POLITICS.

For how it works quite well in the collective good see China:

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/198555.stm

and see Britain in its early days when the seeds of a new science were
sowed:

https://www.galtoninstitute.org.uk/Newsletters/GINL0006/name.htm

For how some are now desperately struggling to make Libertarianism work via NGOs against all genetic odds, see Standard and Poor.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8937113/Debt-crisis-all-17-eurozone-countries-face-losing-AAA-credit-status.html

and for someone who has warned against EU proscriptions:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/3321686/EU-law-on-eugenics-attacks-our-freedom.html

https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/mar/27/highereducation.science

I suggest you look into what happened to David Colemen (Professor of Demography at Oxford) at the hands of well-meaning, but terribly ill-informed protestors. You appear to be rallying for the deregulators, perhaps unwittingly. They call themselves "anti-nazis", but what are they actually pro if not free-market anarchism?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

the one sad fact from last night's NN was 'it will happen again' and why shouldn't it? Youth today are not second class citizens but fourth or fifth class, no education unless you are rich, no jobs, no future, hated and villified by most media and sent to jail for four years if you 'imagine' a riot. We trash our youth at our peril as ten years down the road the movie Clockwork Orange will be a tea party to what could happen.......

I'm not going to say a word

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070562/Muslim-girl-gang-kicked-young-woman-head-walk-free-court-judge-hears-used-drunk.html

That's the same article I quoted above in my post @72! I should not have commented on it.

#75 Ah Mistress, us Brits have to keep our lips sealed, remember, walls have ears! ; )

As at #74, No comment

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8937962/Student-Mundill-Mahil-lured-TV-exec-to-his-death-following-attempted-rape.html

'73. At 14:10 6th Dec 2011, stevie - We trash our youth at our peril.

Clockwork Orange had a great soundtrack. But I do recall the 'vision' was hard to stomach. Also seem to recall the youth on elder encounters were lacking a dimension perhaps introduced after its conception. Not in a good way.

Timing as they say, is everything. When it comes to who trashes whom, it would appear also to depend on factors beyond the law in how different folk perceive matters.

But when you play fast and loose with the law, or media reporting, depending, things will seldom improve.

Personally, my two youths are the apples of my eye, and as first class as I can make them. Which includes them being well aware of what is expected in return for the rewards they get beyond love and support. To family, community and country.

Oddly, just about all the kids round here are the same. Except maybe a few who hate the police. Not for imaginary reasons, to be sure.

'75. At 14:44 6th Dec 2011, Mistress76uk -
That's the same article I quoted above in my post @72! I should not have commented on it.

Get an article on a report on it in another paper, and you'll have a panel commenting all night long.

Go figure. Ain't exclusivity unique?

SO MUCH THAT CRIES OUT FOR DISCUSSION WITH GRAVITAS (#74-79)

But EDGY BBC have made their Tracy Emin Bed, and must lie in it. NewsyNighty are prime exponents, but have you encountered Eddy Mair at his most banal?

Lucky old Rome; their Last Days were, at least, spared this ordeal.

Junkkmale wrote "I try and avoid 'isms, 'ists 'zis etc as a) never too sure I have the definitions sorted, b) those who do use them are too clear either and c) because they hark back to earlier eras and really don't apply as intended these days, far as I can gather."

You wrote that as if it were a good thing to do but it isn't.

It will just mean that you will avoid thinking and writing clearly as it is never helpful to advocate vagueness and ignorance of history in preference to clarity and study of the past, as one can only learn from history (even doing a research project in the present requires one to look back and appreciate where one's current data came from and how it relates to the work of others).

There have been those in recent times who have promoted exactly what you advocate whilst preaching "transparency" and "openness" (which few fully appreciate has only applied to the Public Sector) which they have thereby undermined relative to where transparency and openness does NOT apply - i.e. the Private and Third Sectors.

You appear to have been recruited to their scurrilous purposes like so much of the rest of the population. It counts/feds upon vanity. It appeals to ignorance, to lack of discrimination (history is bunk etc).

They make out we are now so much more clever etc, except, we are clearly not, the contrary is the case if you look at falling standards.

stevie wrote: "Youth today are not second class citizens but fourth or fifth class, no education unless you are rich, no jobs, no future, hated and villified by most media and sent to jail for four years if you 'imagine' a riot. We trash our youth at our peril as ten years down the road the movie Clockwork Orange will be a tea party to what could happen......."

Just over two generations ago only 5-10% of a cohort went to university, now it is close to 50%. Standards have NOT improved, they have FALLEN, and they were dropped to make MONEY out of students through loans, rents etc. That is what is now has to be reversed.

There are fewer jobs today because a) they have been shipped elsewhere where labour is cheaper, b) because low skilled people have been imported to do the jobs more cheaply.

This is all because too many people who were not very smart had too many kids too early in life, whilst those who were a bit smarter went to work getting the jobs which were there and delayed having families as a consequence. Women were "liberated" to make up the numbers of consumers as the birth rate fell.

Think this differential through to see the long term intergenerational economic and social consequences.

'81. At 15:32 6th Dec 2011, brown-dog -
You wrote that as if it were a good thing to do but it isn't.

You write that as if what you believe, is.

Try considering the possibility it may not be.

As to my recruitment, as it was and is self originated, I cannot accord any other person credit, or blame.

Meanwhile on vanity, and appeals to ignorance, especially in what 'appears', that is perhaps better for others to decide. Not the mods though. Some things are best left framed perfectly by those who create them.

https://photos.weddingbycolor-nocookie.com/p000002676-m4241-p-photo-12365/you-re-wrong--I-m-right.jpg

"Also, it may not feel like it, but a report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies says that the average UK household income has almost doubled in real terms over the past 40 years. We look at where the growth came from, and what could drive future increases."

Will this be a helpful critical analysis, or a celebration of perhaps the biggest mistake we have made in our history?

"Women main drivers of rising living standards: Survey finds that a quarter of growth in household income between 1968 and 2008-09 came from women working"

https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/06/women-main-drivers-living-standards?newsfeed=true

This has done nothing for the indigenous birth-rate, it's made differential fertility worse; it's increased immigration, and it's helped ruin the economy through creating more life-on-debt and more Service Sector employment.

On the other hand, although it's given women more "freedom", note that the Muslim nations don't have debt crises, and don't have a birth rate problem? They are (contrary to appearances), more "biologically fit".
Appearances like "freedom" can be deceptive.

Note how it's spun: "Women main drivers of rising living standards" even though what's risen has been a) differential fertility b) national debt
c) house prices, d) crime and social exclusion, e) marital breakdown, f) drug and alcohol abuse, g) school absenteeism/exclusion, h) the Special Education Needs rate i) immigration j) wealth differentials and k) open hostility towards us internationally as we've followed in the USA's Libertarian foot-steps.

GERMANE TO BRITAIN'S PLIGHT: OFF THE PAGE - THE MAKING OF YOU (Rad 4)

Sadly no repeat on iPlayer.

The point was made that our political elite are generally DAMAGED by the public school encounter. Something I have surmised in many posts.

Dave has a 'thing' about PUNISHMENT (for others) yet his record of BAD BEHAVIOUR, as a senior politician, is appalling. Direct correlation?

Would the sort of 'primitives' that we bomb willy-nilly (for their own good) strip mothers from babies and the young from hearth and home? Or might they PUNISH such abuse?

AGE OF PERVERSITY - UK IS THE CAPITAL STATE - WESTMINSTER THE HUB

Some on here are putting forward incorrect information regarding the definition of 'Eugenics' (not mentioning any names to be BBC/Guardian 'PC').

For a good basic defintion of Eugenics see :-

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/eugenics

Eugenics is 'nonsense for the nasty' - pursued with vigour by the narcissists & 'psychopaths'

EUGENICS AND ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE (#87)

My understanding is that Mother Nature practises eugenics from the first whiff of coded pheromone all through impregnation, conception, implantation, gestation, birth, imprinting, etc etc, and on into competition, infection - oh you get the idea.

Only when the Ape Confused by Language imposes (perverse) individual interest over GROUP IMPERATIVE, does the gene pool go pearshaped. This is naturally self-limiting, given enough time, but the terrible mess of humanity that accrues BEFORE ARMAGEDDON, is something I prefer not to ponder.

The idea that, ultimately, our eugenic efforts will affect the overall fate of man, across the globe, is as silly as Anthropogenic GW. But a culture of reinforcing nature WITH COMPASSION looks preferable to our current madness, to me.

JunkkMale quoted: "brown-dog - You wrote that as if it were a good thing to do but it isn't." and went on to do what so many do, defend the indefensible out of rage "You write that as if what you believe, is.
Try considering the possibility it may not be."

I have.. But just consider: If you did a degree in politics (or these days PPE as many of our politicians have) you'd have been taught all of the things which you say you disregard, or try NOT to do. That pretty much guarantees either repeating errors made in the past, or just not seeing what's going on in dressed new garb (made-over). if you dismiss conventional social categories, what is anyone to make of what you write or say? If they all dismiss conventions too, what must ultimately happen to rational communication and social stability, trust etc? How will anyone know what anyone is referring to?

If one tried to explain how what you've advocated is not advocating ignorance, one would have a hard time, or one would sound like a spin "consultant" at a Call Centre....

As to recruitment, if anyone thinks people are aware of how they're taken advantage of just because they made a "choice" that's as naive as believing one chose to speak English in England, as if people knew, they wouldn't be taken in, or do many of the other things they do so easily.

What you're doing now is what many of us do these days, refusing to be told anything, and holding on to personal views come what may, simply because you can, and we've have been told it's our right. But nobody has the right to have one's opinions accepted as TRUE, as truth and falsehood don't apply with respect to opinion. Knowledge and opinion are different categories. If one says one disregards isms etc it just tells one how someone ignores something. For example, are you going to ignore that the communists got the second highest number of vote sin the Russian election because communism is an ism?

What if this epidemic of irrationality proliferated in part because very few now bother to correct or educate others on matters of fact, precisely because of emotional reactions given that people feel abused when being educated?

If you recall last night's programme, the female shop-keeper lamented that there were no rules anymore, no respect etc. This may be why.
Rationality itself seems to have been undermined for political, or more accurately, commercial/financial, purposes. If one has millions of individuals all with their own rights and choices, regulation, and ultimately social and economic stability and services will become impossible.

My point here, as ever, is that we have a major social problem, and turning it round is going to require something which most people don't want. Most people really do just want to keep things as they have been, i.e having their own way, come what may even though it's been a disaster, and largely one based on credit and entitlement. These exchanges (and you'll see this everywhere) is a collective Oppositional Defiance - related to Conduct Disorder.

88.
At 17:24 6th Dec 2011, barriesingleton wrote:


EUGENICS AND ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE (#87)

My understanding is that Mother Nature practises eugenics from the first whiff of coded pheromone all through impregnation, conception, implantation, gestation, birth, imprinting, etc etc, and on into competition, infection - oh you get the idea.

> Yes indeed - as 'natural selection' & 'Darwinian'.

Claiming that some eg 'human apes' have better genes than others is for the weirdos as far as I'm concerned.

Get ready for another 'lecture'?

'89. At 18:06 6th Dec 2011, brown-dog -

My point here, as ever...'

...was, for this humble reader at least, lost in a very long wash. I accept, in advance, that this is obviously my fault, if it saves time.

Off now to spend time in the company of interesting, amusing folk, whose insights I value.

JunkkMale wrote: "Off now to spend time in the company of interesting, amusing folk, whose insights I value."

Which, sadly, is generally how all the poisons which have been destroying us have been delivered, i.e as goods which are "sexy", "sweet" and "interesting" rather than true.

Just look at the standard indices to see this, but don't ask why, as the answers won't be palatable. Unless the messages are pleasing, they won't be applauded, hence nobody bothers telling anyone anything which is true, instead they write to amuse/entertain, and then complain about the very theatrics which they have asked for (see several posters here) All form no content...

"A FICTIONAL PROGRAMME CALLED NEWSNIGHT"

It's been done . . .

'All form no content.'

And on that note, the race to see who gets the last word is engaged. It seems, important, somehow.

SIR! JUNKKMALE SAID "RACE" SIR! (#94)

Busted. Oh, darn... that's a norty step 'un, for sure.