I really hate doing this blog. I love the British. I love what they have given to the world in terms of literature, law and philosophy. I love that you could always point to their beyond exemplary behavior during the blitz as a standard by which all of humanity should aspire to in terms of character, courage and determination in the face of absolute evil (and just so we’re clear on what that means to me, let me be clear that as much as I love what America stands for I don’t think the mass populace of America at any point in time would have behaved as admirably as the British did if we were subject to similar hardships. We would probably behave more like the f!@#$%^ French.) But as much as I hate doing this, I need to comment on the absolutely disgraceful behavior of the British, especially Londoners.
What caused it?
Well whatever sparked the actual start of the riots, be it the claims of an act of the police shooting someone or something we have yet to learn about, it doesn’t really matter. There are clearly far deeper aspects here, probably best captured by the BBC when they interviewed one of the degenerate rioters who actually had the honesty (stupidity?) to voice her brainless opinion, “It’s the people who have all got businesses. That’s why all this is happening, because of the rich people.” Class warfare. You have to love the childish petulance of the mentality that says “I don’t have anything so I’m going to destroy what you have.” One might hope that witnesses to the violence and devastation would have made the woman who said this have a fleeting thought go through her brain about what her actions and words caused, but I doubt it—I can only be left with the hope that something else went through her brain, preferably made of lead, entering and exiting at a high velocity…and before you ask that would be my attitude to all rioters.
What caused this culture of class warfare and lazy bastards who think they’re entitled to everything?
“The Nazi war machine couldn’t break the British, but the modern welfare state has.”—Ann Coulter
It doesn’t take genius to realize that nearly seven decades of one of the most intrusive, socialistic, and wide reaching welfare states in the world would help create an underclass of lazy entitled whiners who think they have a right to everything and can even destroy the property of others. But this isn’t purely a British problem—it’s a liberal and socialist one. Just look at every time you have any organization that is even vaguely pro-capitalism has a meeting. There are whining little liberals burning things, breaking things, requiring that riot police, tear gas and water hoses be brought out. Now look what happened when the right gets together: you have a Tea Party meeting where people dress up like they’re a colonialist with those funny looking tri-corner hats. Notice the difference, liberals destroy things, conservatives don’t. Maybe it’s just a recent phenomenon….let’s go back to say the 1930’s…wasn’t there a group deeply died to the Democratic Party in the South, I think their name began with a “K”, ended with a “K” and maybe had a “K” in the middle. Okay so liberal violence isn’t all that new. But there were examples of the right being violent back then too, right? Oh wait no, because the people everyone points to as being far right from that time period were the National Socialists—hint to liberals no conservative or right winger in history has advocated the takeover of industry by government or ever used the word socialist to describe themselves, that one goes on the far left also along with communism. And dare we forget that little experiment in socialism in the 1790’s in France? But aside from the historical it can’t be entirely the fault of liberalism, socialism and the welfare for encouraging this kind of violence. When you subsidize, literally reward, dependence on government (all welfare), reward bad choices (all welfare that goes to having children out of wedlock, all medical care for preventable diseases), reward laziness (unemployment), reward low standards (feel good education) and punish good behavior (taxes for people who actually earn money) what do you think is going to happen? Aristotle in Politics envisioned that the state was created to best allow its citizens to achieve happiness, to help create and mold the just and wise person, and foster them in their own personal evolution…the modern welfare state has done the exact opposite, classically-conditioning people to be at their worst. Is that an excuse for their behavior? No, every person has free will and reason and can easily rise above the chains of nature and nurture if they desire to…but neither should we be shocked that people don’t always listen to the best within them and just follow the conditioning presented to them. This is what happens when you treat people like children who are incapable of taking care of themselves; they act like children incapable of taking care of themselves. History more than proves me right on this. From the self-indulgent populace of Rome who would riot whenever they didn’t get their bread and circuses and would support any tyrant who would give it to them, to modern riot masses of Greece, France and Britain. Coming soon the U.S. of A.
What’s to do about this?
Well the logical answer would be to wean people off welfare. World-wide. This sick experiment called socialism has always failed and to believe it will ever work is to exist in a world beyond delusional fantasy. The USA, Britain, all of the EU (and the rest of the world if they know what’s good for them) need to lay out a long term plan, probably over a 20 year period, where all, and I do mean all, nation-wide welfare programs are disbanded. Here in America we need to just scrap social security and Medicaid and Medicare. Other forms of the dole such as homeless shelters, unemployment payments, and basic welfare need to be taken up by local counties and maybe state level governments…all with an eye of pushing private charities, religious organizations, and individuals to take up these aspects of society again and re-humanize charity and compassion. Again these need to be 20 year plans (some programs will probably need 5 to 10, but I think social security is a long term problem. You could kill Medicaid and Medicare completely tomorrow for all I care) to try to avoid the worst symptoms of withdrawal as they are taken out, but these programs at the federal level need to be destroyed.
Now some have quoted a recent study that looked at cut backs in the welfare state and the civil unrest that comes from it. Some may try to dismiss this as foolish liberal propaganda, but I doubt it is. The numbers don’t seem to lie if you actually read the whole report (it will bore you to tears though). What a shock when you cut welfare brat’s entitlements they get angry. Now what conservatives need to take from this is that if only a 2% cut will cause riots (and actually 5% cuts have fewer problems than 2%–more demonstrations, but less riots) then we have two options we cannot cut to avoid these riots or we can cut. If we don’t cut to try and avoid the problem of social unrest, then we’re just putting the problem off for another generation to deal with. Why? Because you can’t just leave things at the status quo and not deal with them. If you just leave funding levels at the exact same amount, then given the growing levels of population, the 2% cut will come anyway because there is not enough to go around to all the new people demanding their entitlement. So the only choice if you want to avoid the riots and strife is to continuously grow the welfare state every year. But what happens after the welfare state grows beyond 100% of what you can tax from working people. See Greece. See the Weimar Republic. Thus our only real choice is to cut, and if we have to cut then let’s get it over with as soon as possible and make it big cuts…oh and deal with rioters in the proper way, with guns. If they want to civilly protest or march or demonstrate, they have that right—they’re bloody stupid, but they have that right. But once it turns violent, once the mob becomes rabid and seeks to destroy what others have created, they have put themselves outside of civilized society and deserve only to be put down. Our only option is to cut.
However, I see a terrible side effect of this study. Many liberals will use this study as a weapon. They will say that we have to grow the welfare state or else violence will erupt. And, watch, they’ll use those words “or else.” They will trade on the fear and terror of the threat of violence and destruction to frighten nations from doing what they have to do to save themselves. They will brandish this “or else” threat not as a pragmatic warning but as a tool to gain more power for their welfare states which allow them to be king of the hill for the moment, the future be damned. Remind me, what do you call people who use the threat of violence to cause terror to get what they want? That’s what you’ll see the liberals in Britain do soon…and the U.S. won’t be far behind.