FA+
Shop
The Riots
14 years ago
I comment fairly regularly elsewhere on the ongoing world situation. As a man who currently lives his life abroad it behooves me to keep up with the intel because it gives me a sense of what may happen, and where.
The riots a few weeks ago in Britain and to a lesser extent in US cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C. have brought to light a trend that shows no real signs of slowing down. I have mixed feelings about these riots and the underpinning circumstances that allowed them to take place with such success.
A small part of me is heartened by the fact that at this point in time there are avenues that free men may take to circumvent governments which has chosen, almost inevitably, to remove governance from the hands of the people themselves and thereby relieve them of the responsibilities that come with self-discipline and self-respect.
A government with the very real power to know about everything everyone does, at every minute of every day is not an avenue to safety, but rather a tunnel without branches leading to slavery. Slavery to a set of increasingly arbitrary rules bereft of any moral worth is not the basis for any kind of government I ever want to be subjected to.
As I said though, this is a small part.
The rest of me is saddened that the only release from this form of government that seems able to take root is absolute nihilism. I have struggled throughout my adult life to learn what is right, and to do right. I say adult life because when I was a child I too chafed at what I felt were unjust restrictions on my behavior.
For some of you, nihilism takes some explaining. It is the belief, explicit or otherwise, that life is without objective meaning. It is the philosophy that is built around the conviction that this purposeless life is thereby rendered, in essence, to be of no value.
When life is bereft of its value, all systems arising from that life are also stripped of their worth. No form of government, self-government or otherwise, can be said to be superior to any other, because quite simply, nothing can be derived from 0 but 0. A complex mathematical truth like this is in fact what amounts to 'common sense' to a nihilist. If I am of no value then you are of no value and if you are of no value what you have has no value and if I take what you have there has been no net loss or gain... I can simply do whatever I want and one reason is as good as any other or in fact, no reason at all.
One often quoted interview that I have both seen in print and heard the recording of allows us to hear the voice of nihilism, which said that essntially the rioters were simply, "showin' the rich people we can do what we want." You can hear the actual interview here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14458424
If you are a nihilist, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with anything those two girls said. It all made sense to them. If you are not a nihilist... then you may have had a hard time listening.
Nihilism rejects individuality. It is an affirmation of nothing in the literal sense; it affirms non-existence. People who do not value their own existence cannot even comprehend the valuation of someone else and laws, the authority to govern, etc. all become at best oppressive, at worst completely meaningless and in all cases no more than something to be ignored or circumvented by any convenient means.
These kids are not TRUE nihilists, at least most of them aren't, because in some dark corner of their hearts they still value themselves. They therefore gang together with like-minded largely hopeless individuals who also only value themselves and all of them place what little value they have in the groups they join.
This is a microcosm of what happens on a larger scale when governments become too oppressive to allow people to excel in their own right and make choices based on some reasoning beyond whether or not they will be punished by the state for choosing wrong.
When you take away a mans's right to property you deprive him of his drive to obtain by his own work. When you redistribute his wealth by government fiat you take away his drive toward charity. When you put laws on every aspect of a man's life you take away his drive toward prudence and temperance. When you take away a man's right to self-defense you take away his drive to find courage. Once you have stripped a man of every virtue... he can have no understanding of justice or mercy.
Once you have placed a man under complete control, you have stripped him of his humanity, and such individuals have no cares for the laws of men, nor their punishments.
In Britain's case and increasingly in the US, we are witnessing a very curious phenomenon that to my admittedly limited knowledge has never before occurred on earth. As governments create more and more laws, and gain more and more power to discover who is and is not following those laws, they are losing the will to properly discipline law breakers.
What this has done is create a class of lawbreakers who are not punished for their crimes. They are simply marginalized and left to commit further crimes which serve only to keep them from joining the ranks of a society they have already demonstrated they have no wish to join.
At any other time in history this would have been an utterly unsustainable solution because these lawbreakers place great expense on their governments and neighbors. In THIS time however, those expenses are leased to others in the form of insurance and debt transferrence along with all the other unsustainable costs of western society like universal health care and unrealistic wages and pensions.
We outsource our costs, and so in the last three or four generations it is only now becoming apparent that the world does not have a limitless budget with which to absorb those costs. Hard choices defered have been made the harder for their deferment. The historically self-evident truth of limited resources has been rendered by accounting tricks as an illusion, but the illusory nature of this truth is becoming harder to sustain.
Materialism offers a partial solution to this problem, but only a partial solution. A reliance on self-interest exclusively has never been demonstrated as sufficient in and of itself to guarantee civilized behavior.
There is no perfect solution, just as there is no Unified Theory. The Uncertainty Principle will always be with us in science and in government, and anyone who claims a solution that will 'save them all' is either lying or worse, a well-meaning fool.
The efforts of the british government have proven... less than satisfactory. The riots all occured in areas that have long been held and controlled by the british government. Somewhat less well controlled areas, such as those in Wales and Scotland... suffered no rioting at all despite exhortations on social media to do so.
A cursory inspection of the differences shows us that by British standards, Wales and Scotland are considerably less 'civilized' than England proper. I am certain that, if not the solution, then at least a better alternative to these rioting teens lay somewhere in the less civilized means employed by Scotland and Wales, rather than increased attempts at further civilization and repression being exercised currently by the ailing british government.
Likewise the only cities that suffered riots in the US were cities which are known to be very progressive. Perhaps a bit of regression would do less harm than good. A bridge too far perhaps. Human nature has demonstrated a remarkable resilience to change. When radical new theories fail, perhaps they should be discarded in favor of older theories that worked if not perfectly, then at least better.
I would put forth the assertion that there is no perfect solution to nihilism, and it will never go away. It is also impossible to see to the needs of all, when we are so many, and the resources we require so few. Therefore I would suggest placing a bit more faith in people to take care of what is theirs. Allow them to manage their own affairs and they will manage them with all their care. Do not condemn a man for protecting his property as well as his life, for he has spent his life to obtain his property, and to have it taken unjustly from him is the same as taking away the years of his life spent in the gaining of it.
I would encourage the british people to take up arms not against their government, but against their nihilists. Nihilists have by their own beliefs rendered themselves valueless. Crush them ruthlessly, and you will have lost nothing and perhaps, gained much.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
Edmund Burke wasn't just blowing smoke. When a lean winter is coming, a shepherd culls his flock because he knows that he cannot save them all and if he does not destroy some, he will lose the lot.
Winter is upon you Britain... just as the leaves are changing in the United States. Your stores are depleted and your borrowing is coming to an end.
What will you do?
The riots a few weeks ago in Britain and to a lesser extent in US cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C. have brought to light a trend that shows no real signs of slowing down. I have mixed feelings about these riots and the underpinning circumstances that allowed them to take place with such success.
A small part of me is heartened by the fact that at this point in time there are avenues that free men may take to circumvent governments which has chosen, almost inevitably, to remove governance from the hands of the people themselves and thereby relieve them of the responsibilities that come with self-discipline and self-respect.
A government with the very real power to know about everything everyone does, at every minute of every day is not an avenue to safety, but rather a tunnel without branches leading to slavery. Slavery to a set of increasingly arbitrary rules bereft of any moral worth is not the basis for any kind of government I ever want to be subjected to.
As I said though, this is a small part.
The rest of me is saddened that the only release from this form of government that seems able to take root is absolute nihilism. I have struggled throughout my adult life to learn what is right, and to do right. I say adult life because when I was a child I too chafed at what I felt were unjust restrictions on my behavior.
For some of you, nihilism takes some explaining. It is the belief, explicit or otherwise, that life is without objective meaning. It is the philosophy that is built around the conviction that this purposeless life is thereby rendered, in essence, to be of no value.
When life is bereft of its value, all systems arising from that life are also stripped of their worth. No form of government, self-government or otherwise, can be said to be superior to any other, because quite simply, nothing can be derived from 0 but 0. A complex mathematical truth like this is in fact what amounts to 'common sense' to a nihilist. If I am of no value then you are of no value and if you are of no value what you have has no value and if I take what you have there has been no net loss or gain... I can simply do whatever I want and one reason is as good as any other or in fact, no reason at all.
One often quoted interview that I have both seen in print and heard the recording of allows us to hear the voice of nihilism, which said that essntially the rioters were simply, "showin' the rich people we can do what we want." You can hear the actual interview here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14458424
If you are a nihilist, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with anything those two girls said. It all made sense to them. If you are not a nihilist... then you may have had a hard time listening.
Nihilism rejects individuality. It is an affirmation of nothing in the literal sense; it affirms non-existence. People who do not value their own existence cannot even comprehend the valuation of someone else and laws, the authority to govern, etc. all become at best oppressive, at worst completely meaningless and in all cases no more than something to be ignored or circumvented by any convenient means.
These kids are not TRUE nihilists, at least most of them aren't, because in some dark corner of their hearts they still value themselves. They therefore gang together with like-minded largely hopeless individuals who also only value themselves and all of them place what little value they have in the groups they join.
This is a microcosm of what happens on a larger scale when governments become too oppressive to allow people to excel in their own right and make choices based on some reasoning beyond whether or not they will be punished by the state for choosing wrong.
When you take away a mans's right to property you deprive him of his drive to obtain by his own work. When you redistribute his wealth by government fiat you take away his drive toward charity. When you put laws on every aspect of a man's life you take away his drive toward prudence and temperance. When you take away a man's right to self-defense you take away his drive to find courage. Once you have stripped a man of every virtue... he can have no understanding of justice or mercy.
Once you have placed a man under complete control, you have stripped him of his humanity, and such individuals have no cares for the laws of men, nor their punishments.
In Britain's case and increasingly in the US, we are witnessing a very curious phenomenon that to my admittedly limited knowledge has never before occurred on earth. As governments create more and more laws, and gain more and more power to discover who is and is not following those laws, they are losing the will to properly discipline law breakers.
What this has done is create a class of lawbreakers who are not punished for their crimes. They are simply marginalized and left to commit further crimes which serve only to keep them from joining the ranks of a society they have already demonstrated they have no wish to join.
At any other time in history this would have been an utterly unsustainable solution because these lawbreakers place great expense on their governments and neighbors. In THIS time however, those expenses are leased to others in the form of insurance and debt transferrence along with all the other unsustainable costs of western society like universal health care and unrealistic wages and pensions.
We outsource our costs, and so in the last three or four generations it is only now becoming apparent that the world does not have a limitless budget with which to absorb those costs. Hard choices defered have been made the harder for their deferment. The historically self-evident truth of limited resources has been rendered by accounting tricks as an illusion, but the illusory nature of this truth is becoming harder to sustain.
Materialism offers a partial solution to this problem, but only a partial solution. A reliance on self-interest exclusively has never been demonstrated as sufficient in and of itself to guarantee civilized behavior.
There is no perfect solution, just as there is no Unified Theory. The Uncertainty Principle will always be with us in science and in government, and anyone who claims a solution that will 'save them all' is either lying or worse, a well-meaning fool.
The efforts of the british government have proven... less than satisfactory. The riots all occured in areas that have long been held and controlled by the british government. Somewhat less well controlled areas, such as those in Wales and Scotland... suffered no rioting at all despite exhortations on social media to do so.
A cursory inspection of the differences shows us that by British standards, Wales and Scotland are considerably less 'civilized' than England proper. I am certain that, if not the solution, then at least a better alternative to these rioting teens lay somewhere in the less civilized means employed by Scotland and Wales, rather than increased attempts at further civilization and repression being exercised currently by the ailing british government.
Likewise the only cities that suffered riots in the US were cities which are known to be very progressive. Perhaps a bit of regression would do less harm than good. A bridge too far perhaps. Human nature has demonstrated a remarkable resilience to change. When radical new theories fail, perhaps they should be discarded in favor of older theories that worked if not perfectly, then at least better.
I would put forth the assertion that there is no perfect solution to nihilism, and it will never go away. It is also impossible to see to the needs of all, when we are so many, and the resources we require so few. Therefore I would suggest placing a bit more faith in people to take care of what is theirs. Allow them to manage their own affairs and they will manage them with all their care. Do not condemn a man for protecting his property as well as his life, for he has spent his life to obtain his property, and to have it taken unjustly from him is the same as taking away the years of his life spent in the gaining of it.
I would encourage the british people to take up arms not against their government, but against their nihilists. Nihilists have by their own beliefs rendered themselves valueless. Crush them ruthlessly, and you will have lost nothing and perhaps, gained much.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
Edmund Burke wasn't just blowing smoke. When a lean winter is coming, a shepherd culls his flock because he knows that he cannot save them all and if he does not destroy some, he will lose the lot.
Winter is upon you Britain... just as the leaves are changing in the United States. Your stores are depleted and your borrowing is coming to an end.
What will you do?
<Cough!> check.
So ya know I gotta respond to this one. (Am I that predictable Yup.)
The riots captured my attention for a few days too. They reminded me
of some important British history that I'll get to in a bit. This is all
suspiciously familiar.
But some underbrush to clear first. Seen in a political light (as you do
here), yes, the riots do look like a reaction to a form of political
oppression, free men being free, etc. and yadda. As a 'frame' to understand
this mess, it's a good first shot.
Point bang on: the governments we Westerners have evolved for
ourselves give lip service to democratic ideals. Leastwise our political
mythology says they're democratic, and there's history to back that up.
But like all political systems in history the point is power, the
trappings are just that, and the *awesome* power of our present
governments dwarf anything, repeat anything human beings have ever
created. Something in people that just likes building pyramids?
Figuratively speaking, ours is past the Moon and not stopping.
So damn right all this is having a [bad] effect on the human spirit,
individuality, self-responsibility, self-respect, self-reliance (oddly,
all the things our politics is supposed to bolster).
And you mention property? Also immensely crucial, and arguably
at the core of all politics. The government that does not protect and
reinforce property rights by rule of law and the consent of the governed
ain't a government for long. Although it'll take some time, gotta buy
rifles, get ammo, train up. . .
(*What* law, and how it's made and enforced, and for whose
benefit, are the sticky points, you'll agree.)
But I will offer a dissent: it is not property that empowers a man but
the faith and belief that he can act in the world in his (or her) own
self-interest, and towards his own survival. Property is but the means to
that end, and not the only one either. Lose that faith and belief in one's
own power and one is either dead fast or ripe for enslavement. Or worse.
Proof? I'll point to the Australian Aborigines, a society that barely
knew how to spell the word property. Some of the toughest people on the
planet. Their faith and belief in their power to survive, both individual
and collective, was pretty damn impressive. Didn't need the idea of property,
per se, or at least not the same kind of idea we've got.
(Our distant ancestors turned to agriculture, their's didn't. We
conflate the idea of property with land and territory, in all senses of
the latter word. Important to define terms here.)
So what of the riots, then? Is nihilism, brought on by overweight
elephantine government, a useful hypothesis here? And is your assertion a
valid one? (ie., that overweight elephantine governments cause nihilism?)
Correct, I think, on one thing, less so on another. And I'll add to the
evidence. In another interview, a very frustrated BBC reporter talked to a
couple of boys who'd gone, ah, sneaker shopping. One of the kids said at
the end that he was doing it because everybody else was doing it.
Yes, there was a flavour of nihilism in action. But not quite the type
that you cite. That's a 'pure' definition, nihilism looked at as a philosophical
stance, a complete estrangement from any system of meaning. And who says you
can't take existentialism too far? The nihilist is throwing up his or her
hands and saying, in effect, it's all a load of crap. Depressing people to be
around, actually.
But you can't get much of a program of action out of this. The true
nihilist doesn't throw bricks, as it were, (what would be the point?) but
instead retreats from it all. The nihilist who says, let's tear it all down
in a bonfire of destruction, ain't, by definition, a nihilist.
Something else was at work ripping the shit out of London. Looks
like nihilism, talks the talk, but doesn't walk the walk. What we had was
a large number of people who saw no objective meaning in the world they
were living in.
To be more precise, all the rioters knew in the abstract what things
were supposed to mean, in the world around them. See a store full of goods,
it means you're supposed to pay money first, then walk out with the goods.
See a cop, you're supposed to be reasonably polite and law-abiding. See a
petrol station, you're supposed to put the petrol into the tank of your car.
Not heave a petrol bomb at the cop, run him down with your car, then
crash through the window of that store and take what you want. Then burn the
store. But that's what happened, wasn't it?
But hey, everybody's doing it. This suggests a 'mass effect' was
at work here, a large number of people whose values, attitudes, beliefs and
opinions had become just bent enough, over a long enough period of time, such
that the right spark could set it all off. Rather, a critical mass effect.
Now, some of these people probably were pretty hopeless individuals
who got their identity wholly and completely from the small group(s) they
belonged to (ie., gangs). It is not plausible that they were *all* like that.
The two boys were straight middle-class, for example.
But they all felt no compunction about running out and looting or
burning whatever caught their fancy. Not a political thought in their heads,
I observe. This wasn't 'Da Revolution' in any sense of the word. The
institutions of political power weren't the targets. Economic institutions, however. . .
Funny how this is more or less what it was like the last time. Or one
of the last times. And it was on a far larger scale too. Turn the Wayback
Machine on. . .
. . .To the first decades of 19th century Britain. Smith wrote that little
book of his back in 1776, everybody grokked it, and Raw and Unbridled
Capitalism was in full flower. The Industrial Revolution was going full steam
ahead (literally).
Britain was undergoing an economic boom the likes of which we cannot begin
to imagine. *Everything* was transformed, all but overnight, centuries of
social systems blown up and overturned by the phenomenal new wealth.
Or that's what it looked like to the people who became wealthy (and that
was a lot). Britain was well on the way to ruling the world by way of cutthroat
and fiercly competitive business practices, supported by politics, and that
was a good thing, right?
Not so much to the large number of people whose values, attitudes, beliefs
and opinions had become *massively* bent out of shape by an economic and
political system that fed them into one end of the machine and spewed sausage
out the other. By this I mean social and political unrest on a scale that
could have burned London *down* a dozen time over, then again just for kicks.
Those who owned property and wealth took the power that gave them and
used it to exploit, to rape, to degrade, to ruin, to oppress, and to disenfranchise.
Oh, and they built some factories too. And if you didn't like it, you free
British person you, you were free to starve to death. Sounds like hyperbole?
Read your history. This is what it was like.
And when it looked like Britain could be destroyed by all this (and it
came close) those who owned property and wealth were more or less forced to
change. Or they too would be destroyed. Self-interest, gotta love it. It's
done so much for the world.
Notice the distinct absence of Big Government during this period. Nothing
on the scale of today, could fit it into a Whitehall cloakroom. The British
government was run by those who owned property and wealth, and for those who
owned property and wealth. What, trust the people to run the government? Oh
no, my good chap, we can't have that.
Today, notice also that capitalism has worked, and has created an economic
system of enormous power and wealth and sheer byzantine complexity. Makes
early 19th century Britain look like the chip shop on the corner, doesn't it?
The people with property and wealth are quite pleased with it, dontcha know.
Are we *absolutely* sure that the riots can be blamed on politics and
government? (however bunged up)
No.
Is it a factor? Probably some.
But like what happened in the early 19th century, causation can be traced less
to the centers of political power, and more to the centers of economic power.
Or rather, how that power has been abused and mismanaged. Criminally so in a
lot of cases.
The horrible thing about property rights, and property and wealth is if it
is not robustly backed up by law (and morality and ethics) everything comes
to bits.
But in our total protection of property rights, somehow we've skipped the idea
of a 'check and balance,' the idea that ownership of property does not give
you the right to harm others. That in your exercise of your property rights,
you must be constrained by a higher obligation and duty [to others] than your
own self-interest. (This is a potentially disasterous idea, BTW. Conniptions
of trouble. . .)
Many of those who own property and wealth in this world wouldn't get this idea
if we wrote it on a two-by-four and smacked them between the eyes with it.
But the rioters who tore London apart get it. Since they're living in the
world that economic irresponsibility has built. How the hell else are they
supposed to think?
Hmmm. Out of coffee. That's a sign. I'll stop here.
Not only do the plods not defend personal property, but if YOU defend your OWN property, they give you free gruel in the clink and label you a danger to burglers.
So, England? Property Rights? Not only are they not to be found on the same page, but they're in different books.
Point the Second: Nihilism DOES play more of a role in these riots than past riots precisely because big brother government GIVES these people the food and housing and quid they needed to buy the blackberries with which they coordinated the riots, not to mention computers to create facebook accounts with. Basic necessities are GIVEN to these people free of charge. They don't even have to pretend to work for their 'benny's.'
Point the third: backing up point the second. Simply because people do not know what nihilism is does not mean they do not practice it. Anarchy is nihilism's social action committee. These kids actively sought anarchy, and even their middle and upper class peers are so disconnected from the moral and social fabric that joining in seemed the happenin' thing to do.
They are living in the world that economic irresponsibility has built, but assuming that the problems at the top have caused the problems at the bottom is to ignore the fact that feeding, housing (with irresponsibily low interest loans in the case of the US) and caring for the people at the bottom (so as to harvest votes) is PRECISELY why there are problems at the top.
So the riots from way back when happened when we just let the proletariat fend for themselves. The riots NOW are because we DON'T let the proletariat fend for themselves.
Shall we just conceed that the proletariat is a fucking problem? I don't suggest we get rid of it, we need a consumer base. But by all means let us remove the kid gloves when dealing with these anarchistic fucks. Let us not hold it against those who own small businesses (the hardest hit by the riots) when the owners of said businesses bludgeon, cut, run over or SHOOT (God FORBID) these uneducated FERAL kids. They barely qualify as human. Treating them as such is to give them a respect they've willfully demonstrated they do not deserve. When you have free schooling, free food, free housing, free clothes... and you still can't find it in your blackened, crack smoke stained heart to get your shit together... sorry, sympathy's sold out.