The forces of the British state

[Gareth]

If I didn't have a horse riding in this race itd be a fascinating study of how the forces of the British state get mobilised to protect their interests. Big business, Westminster politics, the media have all shown, should it ever have been doubted, that the elites have pretty singular interests and work in tandem whenever those interests are seen as being threatened. The way they have mobilised has been amazing, if not surprising. It really does feel thats its now a battle between a mobilised establishment and a mobilised grassroots movement.
And for any of the left that are still unsure, what would convince you if this hasn't. When you have clowns like George Galloway who has in the past railed against the British state siding up with and using all of the same arguments as that state, and effectively arguing that because multi-national corporations and billionaire Ian Wood might react badly, then democracy should be secondary.
If we win this it will have been one of the most incredible achievements of post suffrage democracy in Britain given what were up against.

 

[Dub]

If I didn't have a horse riding in this race itd be a fascinating study of how the forces of the British state get mobilised to protect their interests. Big business, Westminster politics, the media have all shown, should it ever have been doubted, that the elites have pretty singular interests and work in tandem whenever those interests are seen as being threatened. The way they have mobilised has been amazing, if not surprising. It really does feel thats its now a battle between a mobilised establishment and a mobilised grassroots movement.
And for any of the left that are still unsure, what would convince you if this hasn't. When you have clowns like George Galloway who has in the past railed against the British state siding up with and using all of the same arguments as that state, and effectively arguing that because multi-national corporations and billionaire Ian Wood might react badly, then democracy should be secondary.
If we win this it will have been one of the most incredible achievements of post suffrage democracy in Britain given what were up against.

It's relentless Gareth. The BBC news last night was a beauty - Jackie Bird smirked her way through the piece about the RBS leaving Scotland and how that would affect jobs here in Scotland. She did it with some gusto as well until the wee disclaimer at the end where she hurried through "the RBS have confirmed no jobs or services will be lost in Scotland"

My concern here is that the less stout hearted of us might decide to vote no under this barrage of lies and deceits from Westminster and their self serving ilk.

 

[egb_hibs]

Yes and no. It's happening, but businesses are responding to the interests of customers and shareholders which is a bit of a 'so what' point - what else would they do? The state's apparatus is more sinister, and so to the media establishment.

But then this is what it feels like constantly if you hold anti establishment views. Maybe this is striking you because you're less often in that position. I find it all very mild compared to other things. Yes supporters aren't openly demonised as evil or mad, from the bully pulpits of the bbc or the msm rags, nor do they find their employment and livelihood at risk, or find themselves barred from adopting or fostering because of their views, or even risk prosecution; these sort of things are the frequent experiences of dissenters from the liberal elite and it's thugs, from gay marriage to free schools.

I have received short shrift when pointing to the poll results produced by such tactics married to saturation propaganda. As I say, it's all very mild here.

Thank goodness the economy is in large part separate to the state; imagine we had a more socialist model - the debate would simply and literally be starved off the table.

 

[GORDONSMITH7]

If I didn't have a horse riding in this race itd be a fascinating study of how the forces of the British state get mobilised to protect their interests. Big business, Westminster politics, the media have all shown, should it ever have been doubted, that the elites have pretty singular interests and work in tandem whenever those interests are seen as being threatened. The way they have mobilised has been amazing, if not surprising. It really does feel thats its now a battle between a mobilised establishment and a mobilised grassroots movement.
And for any of the left that are still unsure, what would convince you if this hasn't. When you have clowns like George Galloway who has in the past railed against the British state siding up with and using all of the same arguments as that state, and effectively arguing that because multi-national corporations and billionaire Ian Wood might react badly, then democracy should be secondary.
If we win this it will have been one of the most incredible achievements of post suffrage democracy in Britain given what were up against.

Of course the Ruling class will not give up their interests or threats to them without a fight and it should surprise nobody. What is happening is tame I would suggest compared to the full force of the State in 1984. Ask any Scottish,Welsh or English striking Miner. Are you inferring that this is a UK manifestation and that Big Business and the Scottish state at some time in the future of an Independent Scotland would not protect their interests if they were threatened?

BIG G

 

[egb_hibs]

Of course the Ruling class will not give up their interests or threats to them without a fight and it should surprise nobody. What is happening is tame I would suggest compared to the full force of the State in 1984. Ask any Scottish,Welsh or English striking Miner. Are you inferring that this is a UK manifestation and that Big Business and the Scottish state at some time in the future of an Independent Scotland would not protect their interests if they were threatened?

BIG G

on this I would have to agree. How the two of you are advocates of statist politics I really cannot fathom - the bigger it is, the smaller we are.

How does your own view differ from the ruling classes on this one?

 

[GORDONSMITH7]

It's relentless Gareth. The BBC news last night was a beauty - Jackie Bird smirked her way through the piece about the RBS leaving Scotland and how that would affect jobs here in Scotland. She did it with some gusto as well until the wee disclaimer at the end where she hurried through "the RBS have confirmed no jobs or services will be lost in Scotland"

My concern here is that the less stout hearted of us might decide to vote no under this barrage of lies and deceits from Westminster and their self serving ilk.

Dub my position on Scottish Independence/Nationalism and the National Question has been well known to family and friends and has been constant for 40 years, many of course who disagree with me. I do remember discussing this over ten years ago on the Bounce with sKipper I think and I suggested that if there were a referendum in the future on Independence and it was defeated, that many Scottish Nationalists ( as they were pretty much the only ones calling for Independence at the time) would characterize there fellow Scots after the vote as gullible, stupid, brainwashed, traitors and cowards. Watch this space if that were to be the outcome.

BIG G

 

[Gareth]

Yes and no. It's happening, but businesses are responding to the interests of customers and shareholders which is a bit of a 'so what' point - what else would they do? The state's apparatus is more sinister, and so to the media establishment.
But then this is what it feels like constantly if you hold anti establishment views. Maybe this is striking you because you're less often in that position. I find it all very mild compared to other things. Yes supporters aren't openly demonised as evil or mad, from the bully pulpits of the bbc or the msm rags, nor do they find their employment and livelihood at risk, or find themselves barred from adopting or fostering because of their views, or even risk prosecution; these sort of things are the frequent experiences of dissenters from the liberal elite and it's thugs, from gay marriage to free schools.
I have received short shrift when pointing to the poll results produced by such tactics married to saturation propaganda. As I say, it's all very mild here.
Thank goodness the economy is in large part separate to the state; imagine we had a more socialist model - the debate would simply and literally be starved off the table.

I'll ignore the anti-establishment stuff as we've been over this before and despite your claims, you're view is the very epitome of large sections of the establishment.
I'm not sure you can simply state that business is responding to the 'interests' of their customers and shareholders as a, that assumes they (customers especially) all have the same interest and b, there has been a thorough and rational analysis of pros and cons here. I think its more that the UK state and their big business compadres are inherently conservative and want to preserve things as are as this is where they obtain their power from.
The rest is you again shoehorning your own obsessions into every thread so I'll ignore if thats all the same.

 

[Dub]

Dud my position on Scottish Independence/Nationalism and the National Question has been well known to family and friends and has been constant for 40 years, many of course who disagree with me. I do remember discussing this over ten years ago on the Bounce with sKipper I think and I suggested that if there were a referendum in the future on Independence and it was defeated, that many Scottish Nationalists ( as they were pretty much the only ones calling for Independence at the time) would characterize there fellow Scots after the vote as gullible, stupid, brainwashed, traitors and cowards. Watch this space if that were to be the outcome.

BIG G

I've been an advocate for Independence ever since I was a bairn G. I will be heartbroken if we fail but there wont be any recriminations from me. I will not try to hide my disappointment but I will abide by the decision with good grace and await the next chapter.

Was calling me dud a spelling error or is that what you think of me :sadwalk:

 

[Gareth]

Of course the Ruling class will not give up their interests or threats to them without a fight and it should surprise nobody. What is happening is tame I would suggest compared to the full force of the State in 1984. Ask any Scottish,Welsh or English striking Miner. Are you inferring that this is a UK manifestation and that Big Business and the Scottish state at some time in the future of an Independent Scotland would not protect their interests if they were threatened?
BIG G

G, I don't disagree about state mobilisation or the miners strike. And i'm not inferring what you imply at all. I feel no greater or lesser disdain for Scottish big business interests than for British ones (although i do think that this has shown where scottish big business see their interests, and thats with a unified British state.
Gerry Mooney has been writing some interesting stuff on this, as has Neil Davidson
Scotland: State and Devolution…but not Revolution…as yet? | Discover Society

‘Yes’ | Radical Philosophy

 

[egb_hibs]

[MENTION=436]Gareth[/MENTION];

Seriously?

I am placing this in the context of the wider behaviours of the bodies you cite, and their general involvement the dynamics you complain about - and basing this on real things that have actually happened.

You make blithe assumptions in support of your claims, in support of a description of events which is based on an archaic and discredited ideology, albeit one still popular amongst pop stars, celebs and the public sector establishment.

It's not me whose shoehorning in my obsessions Gareth.

If nothing else, at least I am consistent in my opposition to such demonstrations of establishment power, where for you dissenters have 'obsessions' in the majority of cases where you are right behind the establishment steam roller.

 

[Gareth]

[MENTION=436]Gareth[/MENTION];

Seriously?

I am placing this in the context of the wider behaviours of the bodies you cite, and their general involvement the dynamics you complain about - and basing this on real things that have actually happened.

You make blithe assumptions in support of your claims, in support of a description of events which is based on an archaic and discredited ideology, albeit one still popular amongst pop stars, celebs and the public sector establishment.

It's not me whose shoehorning in my obsessions Gareth.

If nothing else, at least I am consistent in my opposition to such demonstrations of establishment power, where for you dissenters have 'obsessions' in the majority of cases where you are right behind the establishment steam roller.

Yes seriously. This is more of your inane ramblings Im afraid. What are you placing in the context of what behaviors by which bodies?
What blithe assumptions am I making in support of what events based on what discredited ideology. Christ man its just lots of words strung together with an aim of sounding clever but lacking any coherence.
In your earlier response you ramble on about statism, ignoring all of our previous discussions on statism. And your using nonsense about pop stars etc, lets get that one out in the open, which pop stars and celebs support my real views, rather than your imagined conceptions of my views.
And you arent consistent in opposition to the establishment, youve never shown any concern about rising inequality etc. you support the very same economic system as all of the establishment, you just want it managed slightly differently. You dont, or at least havent, shown any inclination towards impacting on establishment control of the economy through any workers control or influence etc. your only real complaint with the establishment is that they have told you certain words and behaviours arent socially acceptable anymore and there has been a modicum of social protection that you, along with the tories, ukip, and much of the media want to dismantle. Anti-establishment my rear end.

 

[HenryLB]

If all you've got is a hammer every problem starts to look like a nail, I guess.

 

[egb_hibs]

So much wrong in one small place.

First, I'm placing the efforts of state and media that you complain of , into their context; this is a mild demonstration of those efforts compared to others, as you would easily appreciate if you were more regularly on the receiving end. I don't see what's complicated here.

You're making blithe assumptions that people haven't done analysis. RBS won't be waiting for some post grad thesis to explain the world to them. This discredited ideology is Marxism in all its western middle class flavours; all this substanceless rumbling about sinister interests, when they are shareholder and customer interests that are quite clear and unsurprising.

You are completely wrong to say that I am unconcerned about inequality. Quite the opposite - I am willing to tackle the uncomfortable things that cause it, while you will not, and prefer more comforting theories that will never happen.

Finally, on the state and statism, you've persuaded me of the practical difference between theoretical enthusiasm for it, and supporting it in practice until some never to arrive ideal conditions makes it unnecessary.

Anyway, enough from me, this is old ground. Suffice to say what the yes campaign is on the end of is a rather mild expression of establishment power compared to others.

 

[Gareth]

So much wrong in one small place.

In your narrow conception of the problems of the world maybe

First, I'm placing the efforts of state and media that you complain of , into their context; this is a mild demonstration of those efforts compared to others, as you would easily appreciate if you were more regularly on the receiving end. I don't see what's complicated here.

Its not complicated, its just narrow at best and completely wrong at worst. The state and the media are implacably opposed to pretty much everything I believe in so my views are pretty much always on the receiving end. You on the other hand disagree with the elites over some social issues and inflate that to some general anti-establishment disposition. Yes, large parts of the elite disagree with your conservativism on social issues, but large parts agree. On the other side you are at one with them on economic issues so can you stop trying to pretend your some anti-establishment lone wolf as it doesnt stand up to scrutiny.

You're making blithe assumptions that people haven't done analysis. RBS won't be waiting for some post grad thesis to explain the world to them. This discredited ideology is Marxism in all its western middle class flavours; all this substanceless rumbling about sinister interests, when they are shareholder and customer interests that are quite clear and unsurprising.

Your absolutely obsessed with higher education eeg, its bizarre. At its best what higher education does is equip people to ask questions, analyse things and come to their own conclusions, why does that scare you so much.
Re RBS, its not a question of them and others waiting or not waiting for analysis. Its the coordination of these things as soon as a particular poll went in a particular way, and if Robert Peston is to be believed, the UK Government also have their fingerprints all over the supermarket bosses recent announcements too.
And finally, I think youve consistently shown you dont understand marxism or any other form of socialism given, for example, you once said Bush and Thatcher were socialists because they spent money.

You are completely wrong to say that I am unconcerned about inequality. Quite the opposite - I am willing to tackle the uncomfortable things that cause it, while you will not, and prefer more comforting theories that will never happen.

Ok, what causes it that you tackle. I now predict youll focus on social issues and ignore the economic system but lets see.

Finally, on the state and statism, you've persuaded me of the practical difference between theoretical enthusiasm for it, and supporting it in practice until some never to arrive ideal conditions makes it unnecessary.

I assume you mean theoretical lack of enthusiasm for it? This is where your inherent conservativism comes out though eeg, you cant/wont even comtemplate that things can radically change so you focus on the small areas of particular interest to you while leaving all else untouched.

Anyway, enough from me, this is old ground. Suffice to say what the yes campaign is on the end of is a rather mild expression of establishment power compared to others.

Indeed it is old ground, old ground you couldnt resist going over again. But the final thing Id say is that I didnt say this was a unique expression of establishment power, but an fascinating example of it.

 

[egb_hibs]

What you call social conservatism is a precondition of a free society and certainly of working class advancement. It's really strange that you charge me with unwillingness to contemplate major change, when you are bought into the things that perpetuate the status quo, or diverted by the opium of the bourgeois - completely academic political theory that turns attention away from any possibility of actual change.

What do you think causes rising inequality? I think it is part of much bigger things than you are willing to contemplate. It results from values, the advance of 'social liberalism', identity, technology, migration, deregulation, globalisation, increased lifespans and falling birth rates. It is not going to be fixed by global trade unions any time soon. The complexity is perhaps intimidating for some, but simplistic responses will never offer more than comforting illusions.

These things are in fact too complicated to be fixed by technocrats - that is why social elements are so important; conditions are more addressable by thousands and millions of individual actions, and those are shaped by social things. But then that would ask things of me and you and everyone, which is a tougher sell than griping about one scapegoat or another.

Isn't it actually you that is a conservative rather than me - you are looking to the past for solutions to problems of modernity?

A discussion of inequality and it's dimensions may be worthwhile - the old ground can be left where it is.

Ps i am a big fan of education, hence my ire at its traducing and the impact on social mobility (not to mention the conformism to pc pieties large chunks of the sector seem embroiled in - far from encouraging questioning). The point you responded to was a reference to your overly reverential approach to academic papers as the arbiters of things. Secondly, socialism and Marxism are not synonymous - it's remarkable hubris when Marxists try and make it so; Marxism is a form of socialism. I can't recall calling Bush a socialist, but did point out he spent and extended the state like one, which is true. Finally, I'm not sure why this mild example of establishment power is fascinating, but given it's now firmly within your attention I hope we can look forward to you opposing such expressions of establishment power in future, even if it's in support of things you approve of,

 

[Gareth]

Ok, one last contribution from me on this

What you call social conservatism is a precondition of a free society and certainly of working class advancement. It's really strange that you charge me with unwillingness to contemplate major change, when you are bought into the things that perpetuate the status quo, or diverted by the opium of the bourgeois - completely academic political theory that turns attention away from any possibility of actual change.

What academic political theory am I diverted by? Im not aware of ever having written any academic political theory on this board, or could it be that its another EGB straw man. And you have never given any indication of wanting to change underlying economic realities, ever.

What do you think causes rising inequality? I think it is part of much bigger things than you are willing to contemplate. It results from values, the advance of 'social liberalism', identity, technology, migration, deregulation, globalisation, increased lifespans and falling birth rates. It is not going to be fixed by global trade unions any time soon. The complexity is perhaps intimidating for some, but simplistic responses will never offer more than comforting illusions.

On the first point, I agree all of these things are contributors, indeed Id posit that the whole socio-economic system causes rising inequality, so not sure how I can be accused of not wanting to contemplate its size. Indeed I think its you with your narrow focus on only social issues that refuses to contemplate the magnitude of the problem. So, for example, your solution to the impacts of globalisation and migration is to put up borders, allowing economic globalisation to continue unabated and hence doing nothing to fix the problem but merely dealing with some of the visible manifestations of it. my comment about global trade unions was related to one small part of globalisation and you know it, that was the mobility of capital, which I argued could only be countered by the mobility of labour or labour being organised internationally.

These things are in fact too complicated to be fixed by technocrats - that is why social elements are so important; conditions are more addressable by thousands and millions of individual actions, and those are shaped by social things.

I dont disagree with that at all.

Isn't it actually you that is a conservative rather than me - you are looking to the past for solutions to problems of modernity?

Where am I looking to the past? And if you can avoid hubris about marxism etc when responding that would be good. In any discussion weve had about the future, where have I fixated on the past?

A discussion of inequality and it's dimensions may be worthwhile - the old ground can be left where it is.

Good, as Ive said many times I think its one of the defining issues of our age.

Ps i am a big fan of education, hence my ire at its traducing and the impact on social mobility (not to mention the conformism to pc pieties large chunks of the sector seem embroiled in - far from encouraging questioning).

But thats based on your caricature of higher education, not the reality.

The point you responded to was a reference to your overly reverential approach to academic papers as the arbiters of things.

Thats nonsense eeg. What I will do is point to evidence where it exists to support my view, and whether you like it or not academic evidence is valid, not lacking in bias but the peer review system ensures intellectual rigor to some degree. Meanwhile you have said, and I quote, Im not interested in evidence. On the other side reports by think tanks dont have such rigor and conform more concretely to funders demands, be that liberal ones like IPPR or right wing ones like Policy Exchange.

Secondly, socialism and Marxism are not synonymous - it's remarkable hubris when Marxists try and make it so; Marxism is a form of socialism.

Im perfectly well aware of that which is why I said you dont understand Marxism or any other form of socialism. Its remarkable when people refuse to read what youve actually written.

I can't recall calling Bush a socialist, but did point out he spent and extended the state like one, which is true.

You did in a discussion that showed that youre parameters of what constitutes socialism was bizarre at best.

Finally, I'm not sure why this mild example of establishment power is fascinating, but given it's now firmly within your attention I hope we can look forward to you opposing such expressions of establishment power in future, even if it's in support of things you approve of,

I find it fascinating, you dont then fine.

 

[egb_hibs]

Sorry I misread the point on Marxism / socialism. Come off it with your misrepresentation of my point on evidence. The point I was making is that I don't care about rationalisations that try to persuade that black is white, or that self evident issues are not issues. The context was integration, where there are clearly issues. By the way, I've looked into it and I'm not sure how the census supports you or could support you, given the nature of the data collected.

I shall pick up Inequality later - I'll start a new thread so others can engage in the topic if they are interested.