20 Comments

Beat us harder and then blame us for all the woes of government tyranny. The more you treat people like rats, the more they'll act like rats. The more you make them dependent, the more they become dependent. The more you speak of fear, the more fearful they become.

I think the poor individual is lost because too many cannot understand the obvious morality and peaceful world of "live and let live" compared to "force and obey." The latter will always have worse outcomes.

Expand full comment

And they also know that when people are at their most fearful, they are most likely to evince the nasty authoritarian streak, and reach for like-minded government as a proxy to rule the lives of others.

Expand full comment

Great poem. I memorized it years ago for my dad for his birthday or Father’s Day. He’s a Yeats fan and we’ve been to Yeats’ tower.

Expand full comment

I love it. The sinister undertones are what give it such gravitas, that, and the sense of everything falling apart.

Expand full comment

It was always inevitable that like would seek out like and that 'thinking fast' would win out in an enhanced communication environment. That this was glossed over at the time was also inevitable given our propensity to be positive about change without balancing it with caution.

There are many factors acting here not just one or two. This complexity is beyond the capacity of most minds to comprehend and they just end up seizing on one factor which fits their prejudices. The information bubble kicks in and dissonance ensures that the complexity of a situation is lost.

The other element that really impacts is nostalgia but there's a trap. It's false. The belief in lost utopias is illusory - they never existed. We can basically say that things are better than they ever were but there's still a long way to go.

Expand full comment

Wow. I really love the bit about nostalgia. I've often thought the reason why our politicians are becoming so psychotic is because they are desperately trying to hold onto the Francis Fukuyama era, with its inherent stability. They just don't realise how badly they fucked it all up. Don't get me wrong- neoliberalism and globalisation did a lot of good for the world, especially the developing world, but it hollowed out Western societies fatally.

One notices that now the Chinese are doing the same that we did, making East Africa China's China, it's only the lower value labour they are offshoring- they're keeping the good stuff in tradeables for themselves. They've learned from our mistakes. One sees the massive expansion in higher education throughout the Western world and one sees what the elites were after. What idiocy, to persist in the notion of Blank Slatism after all the evidence to the contrary has been amassed. People were never going to be as malleable in their capacity as they thought.

And this is before one considers that through labour, capitalism possesses its own 'watering' system. They forgot Henry Ford and his Model T. They forgot Say's Law- neoclassical economics may have its advantages, but only if one still teaches and remembers the basics, the foundational principles. Britain used to be one of the most laudable countries in the world, with almost no crime, yet now it tops the charts of Europe. Why? Because they destroyed labour for an entire class of people, and made them state dependent- did they really not understand all the social ills which would be unleashed?

Expand full comment

I'm not convinced the Chinese have learned from our mistakes. China is currently making a bid for domination but beyond a crust is actually very wobbly. The main issue in Chinese growth is corruption. Of course, one finds this everywhere but in China it's almost a national sport. As long as the bureaucracy can be bought off elements of Chinese society will continue to do so. This includes, among other things, exporting food with literally fatal levels of pesticides in them.

Politicians have been making a mess of things for centuries. Nostalgia ensures we forget that and it also ensures people do in fact remain very easily maleable. Britain has never been a crime free country and is better now than it was. A good source on how things used to be is Ian Gilmour's 'Riots, risings and revolution' or going further back David Mattingly's 'An Imperial Possession'. Britain has always spun well.

People tend to forget just how things were and focus on the rosy tinted past. If we wind things back to Orwell or Victorian times we find grinding poverty and deprevation. There was no golden age.

Expand full comment

The thing about the Chinese corruption is that the Chinese people get really, really infuriated about it- to the point they virtually demand the head of whichever local official is responsible for a particular debacle. At the edge of memory I can think of one time where a local official cut corners on a building project in an earthquake zone for the usual brown envelopes. I also heard about their honey problem re: pesticides- which is ironic given they don't have the actual bees and have to spend $9 billion a year on hand pollination.

You should listen to, read or watch some Anthony Daniels (aka Theodore Dalrymple) on the subject of British crime. I was shocked when I found out we topped the European leagues for crime as well- but apparently this isn't uncommon amongst Brits because it is a problem which mainly affects the poor, its main victims. But when I was talking about glory days, I was thinking more about the immediate post war period, when Peel's reforms had been in effect for over 100 years and we had yet to experience the baleful effects of the sixties.

Don't get me wrong, there was a lot of useful egalitarian social progress which came out of the period, but sadly crime, the family and institutional welfare (admittedly a little early) all degraded what was once a very law abiding country into something else. In the space of one year total armed robberies shot from 7 to 50 in the capital alone.

I agree with you about the Victorian period and Orwell- but with Orwell, we have picture more of the follies of socialism and the social consequences- as well as the greyness inflicted by austerity. Although Mark Blythe is a Lefty economist, he is also highly sensible about the dangers of austerity, and has shown how time and again. austerity shrinks the denominator by more than the numerator.

This doesn't mean that we shouldn't want to cut government spending, but rather that the reforms should be structural, incremental and gradual, and should probably pause when the economy isn't going well. It's one of the few things Keyes got right- the bit about thrift during booms and spending during downturns, but I've yet to see a government which has the fiscal discipline to do the former.

You're right about there being no golden age, it was decidedly grey due to austerity, but it was decidedly crime-free. This article from the Independent in the nineties would tend to argue the contrary, but what the professor fails to take into account was that in the 1950s, people were far more likely to report than in any other period, before or since, because of the highest levels of societal trust of any British period in history: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/truth-behind-a-mythical-golden-age-statistics-supporting-the-view-of-a-more-violent-society-do-not-tell-the-full-story-academics-say-1550414.html?r=68300 .

It's also true to say that the British police had become much better at keeping records. Of course, there was a lot of crime: a lot of tax dodging, organised crime and, above all, protection rackets. Many a crate of goods found itself mysteriously absented from a warehouse. My grandfather, on my mother's side ran the fruit and veg for Norwich market, as well as owning several other side businesses. He knew the Richardson's and our local villains, the Cossey's, but he was only at the periphery, and not really involved in all that, other than the odd tax fiddle.

The other thing was that criminals were somewhat terrified of getting beaten up by ordinary citizens. Crimes against property were tolerated, but crimes against persons were not. I heard stories of one local girl getting raped back then. They drove a car into his legs at thirty miles an hour.

Expand full comment

Some excellent points particularly about austerity. Historically the Chinese have always protested corruption. Classic novels such as 'Outlaws of the marsh' and 'Creation of the Gods' are built around this premise. The honey example I am familiar with but I was thinking of more recent troubles relating specifically to Japan (frozen gyoza and leaf vegetables).

I'm very interested in your comments about the 50s. I'm not sure that criminal gangs would have been worried by members of the general public. The Krays certainly wouldn't have been. Human beings have a tendency to obscure bad things particularly if they are only peripherally affected by them. The 50s were the time of payroll robberies which disappeared with salaries and direct payments into banks but for a time were a major source of income for criminal gangs. However, when humans look back they succumb to nostalgia and that is always a viewpoint which emphasizes the positive. That is not to say that crime nowadays is marginal but that it needs to be seen in the context that the British Isles have always been a violent culture.

Expand full comment

Lol- 'that the British Isles have always been a violent culture.'- doubtless something to do with our love of pubs...

Expand full comment

The love of alcohol certainly. We don't need pubs to get fighting drunk.

Expand full comment

Hi Geary, our politicians, at least in the last 30 years, have never had the well-being of the population in mind. The problem is that can we really vote for them, in or out?, i do not think so, i think that the EU would stonewall any politicians elected that would not have been "pre-approved by them", same applies to USA and the social media giants. Can it be that elections are just part of the circus?, really and truly i think i live in the film "V for Vendetta" in the moment they are watching the news on TV. Further to that a big chunk of our population continues voting for a continuation of the circus and following the advise of the circus, i think it was Winston that said "the best argument against democracy is half an hour talk with the average voter".

I think we need a completely overhaul of the education. I think that a pre-requisite for presenting oneself for an election would be to have paid taxes for at least 15 years in the private field, be it as a worker, an entrepreneur or a self-employed, public servants would be excluded from holding office. I would also request that for having the right to vote people should have paid taxes for at least 10 years in the private industry and 10 in the public service.

Is that fair? I do not enter in that discussion, i think we will do much better.

That taxes should have a purpose, so i tax this to pay that (no more and no less) and clear link between what is being paid at each point and the use of it. If that would happen i think people would have no issue in paying many things, and will offer full resistance for other things.

Nice weekend

Expand full comment

'Can it be that elections are just part of the circus?' -probably. I didn't like Trump. I found him rather odious actually, but he did have the advantage of being a relative outsider, and a disruptor to boot. What I would suggest is that a large part of it is sheer bloody ineptitude, rather than corruption.

Let me give you an example from the UK. Our driver shortage, which began in the fall of last year, and to a much lesser extent is still ongoing. A braver man, a man with a bit of steel for a backbone, would have argued back to the media, and said that this was exactly what Brexit was all about- tighter labour markets and employers forced to pay fundamentally higher wages (20%+) for the blue collar class. He should have said that it was a disruption, and to be expected, as the market was forced to raise employee wages. He should have also said that he was sending in the Army to help deal with critical issues like fuel (which he actually did).

But none of this was forthcoming. He didn't 'turn' the criticism, he lacked the imagination and folded like a cheap suit. If he had been a smart man, an empathic man, he would have talked about the appalling working conditions of drivers, the long hours and dreadful treatment by both employers and corporate customers- and argued that they should have every right to fundamentally try to raise their pay to acceptable levels, and that, given the windfall presented by the advantages of so many working remotely, in terms of overhead cost, most companies should simply reallocate their budgets, shut their offices and call centres, and invest in better pay for drivers.

He could have had the British public eating out of his hand, especially when he threatened to stick his boot up the arse of the DVLA, who apparently had a backlog of 55,000 fully qualified British drivers who were being tempted back into the occupation by the expectation of higher rates of pay. The backlog was caused by civil servants too afraid to go into the office during the pandemic- of vital importance, given the need to check physical documents and issue them from a secure and monitored location- although I will admit that the especially vulnerable should have been told to stay home.

At one point, the Co-operative, a supermarket chain specialising in smaller shops, was offering agency workers £25 an hour, plus a £50 day bonus. To their existing drivers, they offered nothing. Little wonder there was disruption. It's accepting the media frame, like a donkey, which makes them so weak, feeble and ineffective. They are all such cosmopolitans, and come from the same insipid class as the media and haven't taught themselves to think any other way.

I think it's more sheer ineptitude than corruption.

Expand full comment

related to this subject i leave you a very interesting article of this week, it is in Spanish but you can apply google translator

https://www.vozpopuli.com/opinion/otan-interes-espana.html

Expand full comment

in the article there is a link to a video of a conference of Jose Zorrilla, unfortunately the conference is in Spanish but if you have the chance to watch it with somebody that could translate it for you, please really do. If with the translation of the article you find problems let me know. Sorry about all this homework :)

Expand full comment

Great essay - Oilman

Expand full comment

I remember your real name now, after the posting issue we both had, with comments not updating!

Expand full comment

Cheers mate!

Expand full comment

Mutual systemic mistrust is a novel idea, with plausibility right now. Also enjoyed the observation that many of us are gleefully exploring this moment as if it's some kind of entertainment.

Expand full comment

Well, it does seem to be most prevalent amongst the ideologically possessed. The problem with derangement is that it invites derangement in response. One of the most poignant moments was Winston Marshall discussing his cancellation with Bari Weiss. Apparently the culture warriors on the right had been just as unkind about his apology, as the Left had been with the original incident. Jeez! Give the guy a break! He was new to it all, and was just trying to shield his friends, bandmates and family from the fallout.

People who are culturally engaged simply forget that most people really don't understand even a smidgeon of what is going on. Most of friends and family don't really understand what woke is. It's quite funny- the hairdresser who comes round my house has a mother who is convinced that her son is trans. She was so confused. I quizzed her for about half an hour, and told her not to worry, her son is probably just gay. She is really, really lucky that he lives in the UK- in many places a tragedy would doubtless ensue.

Setting aside the X000%'s increases in reporting of gender dysphoria, with social contagion the most likely cause, we really need to remember that even with the Dutch protocol, 6 to 9 out of 10 kids grew out of it. And they were specifically selected to exclude the autistic and simply gender nonconforming. Most people simply lack the discipline to do any research whatsoever for themselves, and don't even know the Maths built into most studies. I had one college professor link me a study on evidence of racist views in the American population- admittedly the views were odious, but the increment of the population which held them was tiny! He actually had the Maths- he had simply forgotten it in the intervening years. Nice guy, liberal, Left on some issues, especially government- but of the older, class-based, more laudable type of Leftism.

He's actually come around to my way of thinking on a lot of issues, and even wrote an article in Areo about it recently. It's excellent: https://areomagazine.com/2022/05/23/the-1619-project-an-oversimplified-explanation/

Expand full comment