Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 10, 2011

Cameron's Sick Pockets Of Society

This is from David Cameron's speech today. It required only slight modifications in the third graph to be truthful and  perfect:

Its all too clear that we have a big problem with gangs in our country. For too long there has been a lack of focus and a complete lack of respect shown by these groups of thugs.

I am clear that they are in no way representative of the vast majority of young people in our country who despise them frankly as much as the rest of us do. But there are pockets of our society that are not just broken, but frankly sick.

When we see [banksters and hedge fund managers as young as 25 and 30] looting and laughing, when we see the disgusting sight of [an old couple] with people pretending to help them while they are robbing them [through fraudulent mortgages], it is clear there are things that are badly wrong in our society.

For me the root cause of this mindless selfishness is the same thing I have spoken about for years: it is a complete lack of responsibility in parts of our society.

People allowed to feel that the world owes them something, that their rights outweigh their responsibilities and that their actions do not have consequences. Well they do have consequences.

We need to have a clearer code of values and standards that we expect people to live by and stronger penalties if they cross the line. Restoring a stronger sense of responsibility across our society in every town in every street in ever estate is something I am determined to do.

Unfortunately Cameron would never make such a speech with the banksters and hedgies in mind. He totally lacks selfawareness and does not understand that the looters in the streets of London, Manchester and Birmingham are just copycats when they are taking what they do not own. The real sick pockets of his society are not the looters but are sitting in the city of London.

For years the neo-liberals have praised consumption, the selfishness of Ayn Rand and have not a shown the tiniest bit of qualm when robbing first from the people and now from whole nations.

With such amoral examples praised and held up to the highest honors by Cameron and his media friends, how can one blame the youth for following them? Preaching greed is good has consequences.

Posted by b on August 10, 2011 at 16:37 UTC | Permalink


Yeah, well it wasn't a very wise speech. Rushed, I thought. The riots have unsettled him, and he's giving his gut reaction. Not everyone in Britain thinks like he does.

I'd give him a couple more years. Things going wrong are beginning to snowball.

Mind you a poll today suggested 91% think live ammunition should be used on the looters.

Getting like Syria, huh?

Posted by: alexno | Aug 10 2011 17:05 utc | 1

here's an Open Letter to David Cameron’s Parents

same theme as b

btw: hey, why not fill out that little box with the numbers 4 f'ing times to be able to post. this is so much fun!

Posted by: annie | Aug 10 2011 17:07 utc | 2

"When we see [banksters and hedge fund managers as young as 25 and 30] looting and laughing, when we see the disgusting sight of [an old couple] with people pretending to help them while they are robbing them [through fraudulent mortgages], it is clear there are things that are badly wrong in our society."

Love that b, file under "speeches society needs to hear."
Unfortunately, the engineers of the train still want to blame the passengers for the train wreck.

Posted by: ben | Aug 10 2011 17:09 utc | 3

The way that you mock the Brits, in this and the last post, is quite justified, in my view. They have been particularly idiotic.

Such idiocy is useful, however, in showing up the real motives.

I would quite like it that the real motives should be shown up, but the Brits are submissive, and they will accept anything ther government says.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 10 2011 20:10 utc | 4

the poor brits... they're cought in a double bind...

first of all, just prior to the 9/11 operation, brit oil and gas production peaked and the brits have become net importers of gas and oil, which may explain tony blair's enthusiasm for the PNAC energy acquisition project...

and, if the PNAC project is also a land acquisition project, most especially for israel as it grabs more high ground in the west bank, that might explain why tony got that million dollar leadership award from israel... admittedly, a million bucks is chickenfeed, but what poor-but-honest brit politician is gonna turn up his nose?

anyhow, high oil prices become a net loser for the brits, but low oil prices reduces their income from their remaining production... brits are losers, either way, and it turns out that poverty trickles down a lot quicker than thatcherite prosperity.

in fact, it looks like the whole "trickle down theory of economics" is nothing more than cover for looters that have seen the peak oil handwriting on the wall since american production peaked in 1970.

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 10 2011 20:27 utc | 5

then, depending on how paranoid you want to be...

BP is sabotaged by cheney's halliburtion cement job in the gulf of mexico, and everybody, especially matt simmons, start yapping about the imminent bankruptcy of BP, which undoubtedly would have been snapped up, at fire sale prices, by the world's most valuable company, exxon...

...exxon, which happens to be allied with the neocons of the AEI who hatched the PNAC plan... who also happen to be some of the most prominent deniers of global warming and peak oil...

...peak oil and global warming being, in turn, the prime motives for PNAC's 9/11 operation, seeing as how they needed a "new pearl harbor" to kick off their land and oil acquisition project.

so matt simmons expires in his hot tub, BP apparently survives the attempted doublecross, and everyone goes their merry way --bombing the dogshit out of more oily muslims-- until the poverty becomes intolerable to UK young people.

well, that's what all that loot's for... to buy protection from the unwashed masses, isnt it?

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 10 2011 20:45 utc | 6

You really need to be making a distinction between England and Scotland. We in Scotland have been riot free. The English are a peculiarly bigoted, arrogant and and ignorant race, and stupidly submissive and subservient to their money grabbing masters. The enlightened Scots are totally superior in education and culture to the dull witted English. It is this superiority that has ensured we Scots are able to watch with amused disdain at the antics south of the border. The present fiasco mis one more step towards the severance of the unjust and unequal link between a lazy, violent, corrupt and decadent England and an enlightened and industrious Scotland.

Posted by: hilerie | Aug 10 2011 20:48 utc | 7

if the scots can bust loose, you got the oil... you can wash your hands of the lazy violent, corrupt and decedant englishmen, and procede on your merry, enlightened and industrious way.

you ought to do okay for a while, even though your production is declining.

on the other hand, you could move to new zealand, just in case...

sorry, hilerie, i couldnt resist.

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 10 2011 21:06 utc | 8

sorry hilery I had to google this

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2011 21:20 utc | 9

Obama to toughen stance on Syria with call for Assad's departure - latest headline

What a joke. With Britain undergoing similar experiences, what's the use of Obama declaring Syria in default?

Posted by: alexno | Aug 10 2011 22:02 utc | 10

the BBC will never replay this, send it out

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2011 22:06 utc | 11

actually it is getting hilarious:

The BBC said: ''We'd like to apologise for any offence that this interview has caused.''

BBC News also said it had decided to refer to the unrest as ''England riots'', rather than ''UK riots''.

It said the change was ''in recognition of the sensitivities involved for people in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland'', and was in the interest of geographical precision and clarity.

A BBC News spokeswoman added later: "While the rioting and disturbances have been taking place in England, our initial approach was guided by the story's impact for the UK as a whole for example the UK Prime Minister returning from holiday and the decision to recall the UK Parliament.

"Within the wider media we were not alone in this approach. However with the events confined to several cities and towns in England and not Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, we have listened to feedback from our audiences and are now referring to 'England Riots' in our on-going coverage for absolute clarity."

Posted by: somebody | Aug 10 2011 22:09 utc | 12

i'd guess there comes a point where people quit being reasonable, especially when there's a massive orchestrated campaign to defeat reason... which is another name for truth.

during the wats riots in LA, i was still in the marine corps, in santa ana, and we had this plan to land in the coliseum to subdue the riots... the riots were portrayed as blacks destroying their own infrastructure.

if the infrastructure was set up to fuck you over, what's the problem with destroying it?

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 10 2011 23:49 utc | 13

Social commentator, Will Hutton, makes a strong case that social and economic unfairness are fuelling the English riots in this radio interview on ABC(Oz) PM, yesterday.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 11 2011 2:25 utc | 14

Found via Xymphora, at Naked Capitalism, is this remarkably resonant address by James Galbraith, analysing the (unpunished) crimes and Establishment blind spots which made the Sub-prime scam such an unmitigated disaster for The West's soon-to-be serfs.
How Fraud and Bad Economic Thinking Got Us into this Mess

There's a lot of it, but it's worth wading through for its comprehensiveness and common sense.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 11 2011 2:48 utc | 15

In my not so humble opinion, the greatest current threats to democracy are:
1. The 'two party' system of government.
2. Bi-partisan support (among corrupt politicians) for the policy of accepting political donations.
3. The setting of a "threshold of disclosure" for donations which allows donations below the threshold to be secret - along with the identity of the donors.

The net effect of political donations is to allow vested interests to buy/hijack the political agenda of elected representatives.

I would argue that, in the wake of the Sub-prime scam, it would be more cost-effective to outlaw private political donations completely and legislate for public (taxpayer) funding of election campaigns and mandating a ceiling on expenditure for an individual candidate's campaign. This would have the immediate effect of relieving us of most of the bs and tedium of multi-million dollar campaigns. But more importantly it would reduce the funds available for expenditure on vacuous and irrelevant hokum and 'talking points' from professional spin tankers.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 11 2011 3:33 utc | 16

Do you really think these thugs have any idea what the financial services industry is or does? They are the product of a society that rewards with massive benefits people who do nothing and have many children who they then ignore. Traditional authority figures (teachers, police, courts) have been massively weakened by a system that's terrified to punish these brutes. Nothing has any consequences anymore and these immoral idiots are the result.

Posted by: RCS | Aug 11 2011 4:10 utc | 17

"Nothing has any consequences anymore and these immoral idiots are the result."

well, their immorality has some consequences... after all, tony got a million bucks for lying us into iraq, didnt he?

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 11 2011 4:18 utc | 18

b get a load Haaretz's haughtiness...

Between London and Tel Aviv

The protest leaders in Israel are the sons and daughters of the backbone of society - educated young people in a country where social mobility is greater than is common in the conservative West.

I'm positive the Palestinians share that same opinion...! 8-(

Btw, if anybody's interested...

Posted by: CTuttle | Aug 11 2011 4:43 utc | 19

RCS- no 21, I do not know what you mean by "idea", they definitely feel it.
School's out and they have nowhere to go. No jobs, no summer camps, no holidays,no prospects,nowhere to go,no future, no nothing, just an exciting city they cannot afford and a consumer culture that pretends everything is available to everybody.
they are young, they have to do something. what do you except?
"bread and circuses" still works, it is politicians 1+1 since Roman times that there will be trouble if you cut the bread or the circus.
in the meantime even the BBC can no longer ignore what is being done to Libyans
Cameron is a criminal who should go.

Posted by: somebody | Aug 11 2011 5:08 utc | 20

As usual, Craig Murray offers an independent view. One should read the comments and CM's subsequent posts as well.

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Aug 11 2011 7:41 utc | 21

i guess cameron could say,

"look ...we got ourselves into these messes with the americans and the israelis, we're throwing money down ratholes in these wars, and the wars are driving up the price of oil, which hurts us since we've become oil importers...

"...not only that, but the cream of our society has risen and turned to scum, and their looting activities are enabled by corrupt laws and lawmakers, and further enabled by corrupt enforcement and justice systems.

"those corrupt people installed me into this office, i have to serve them, so you people either sit down and shut up, or we will lock you up or kill you, because we got the guns, and you dont.

"...because as the oil continues to deplete, it's only gonna get worse, that i guaran-goddamn-tee you."

"...and that's how it's gonna be so long as we fat people are given such marvelous opportunities to get fatter, and are serving foreign masters whose basic moral belief is "might makes right"... because that's our basic belief, too, and besides all that, we need more loot so we can defend our fat selves from the likes of you.

"thank you, and goodnight."

given the fat people's history, it's probable that they staged atrocities to discredit the protestors.

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 11 2011 9:51 utc | 22

Gleaned at HKO's link - and better than most of the hobbyhorse-driven pieties:

Posted by: rjj | Aug 11 2011 13:02 utc | 23

What I see - aside from the ‘model’ argument presented in b’s post, which is very apt in view of Cameron’s speech - btw how is he going to inculcate values? what ignorance - is, first, and on the surface, the failure of law and order, which btw is traditional in England. That is only a proximate cause, but how it failed is the first thing that needs to be tackled. I have posted a little about it previous. There is no point in waffling on about youth centers closing or young ppl’s joblessness as there is no direct, clear link between unemployment and rioting/looting. (See e.g. Spain. Or CH, where we have looters who earn 5K a month. In fact, the poor don’t loot. or Scotland, mentioned above.) That runs counter to many’s intuitions, but those intuitions rest on a quasi-Victorian attitude - keep the yobs busy playing football and with a low pay etc. etc. and we’ll have no aggro!

In an individualistic society geared to success thru consumption, possessions, appearance, all of which rate one socially, be it in the local gang or on a housing estate, or in the semi-wealthy suburbs, ppl simply use different methods to ‘get theirs’, echoing b’s post again - and the younger male lower lot’s methods are destructive, disruptive, violent. Others use prostitution; petty scams, theft, burglary, etc. that are never uncovered; blackmail is frequent as well. People are supposed to ardently desire gadgets and status symbols and to work quietly for low pay struggling to realize the dream. Those who cannot or refuse for whatever reason will react in various ways, in different political/ideological and sociological landscapes. They may check out (not possible in England, compare to the US), leave (difficult), marry in, join the authority, or turn to crime, and will explode when it appears that some opportunity (unrest, etc.) presents itself.

England has a very ‘liberal’ economy on the surface - favoring the powerful and rich, etc. etc. - it is even a matter of pride - but at the same has a very heavy state apparatus. These tend to clash... ok that was long enough, not developed, another day.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 11 2011 16:04 utc | 24

Re: HKO's Craig Murray link @ 21 ... Murray raised some worthwhile points in condemning the worst excesses of the looters.
Noirette @ 24 touched on many factors upon which one may or may not be able to build a credible case - one way or another.

About an hour ago, BBC News hit on a concept I'd like to hear Cameron comment on (during an unlikely break in blaming everyone except his own and the previous Govt's policies). It was ...

Role models.

The looters appear to be modeling their behaviour on that of the War on Terror cranks posing as national leaders in the West; inasmuch as their instinctive first response to most, if not all, perceived problems seems to be an extraordinarily violent and merciless one.

I'd like to hear Cameron, Sarko, Obama & Co, prove, beyond a shadow of doubt (these "leaders" only deal in "certainty") that the resort to violence wasn't influenced and inspired by their own attitudes, policies, behaviour and lack of accountability.
I could use a good laugh...

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 11 2011 17:44 utc | 25

if the infrastructure was set up to fuck you over, what's the problem with destroying it? asks groundresonance up at lucky thirteen.

Ain't that the truth in spades.


Posted by: DaveS | Aug 11 2011 17:56 utc | 26

looks like you and me have been looting

Posted by: somebody | Aug 11 2011 20:54 utc | 27

As things fall apart...

“The Middle Class Proletariat — The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx. The globalization of labour markets and reducing levels of national welfare provision and employment could reduce peoples’ attachment to particular states. The growing gap between themselves and a small number of highly visible super-rich individuals might fuel disillusion with meritocracy, while the growing urban under-classes are likely to pose an increasing threat to social order and stability, as the burden of acquired debt and the failure of pension provision begins to bite. Faced by these twin challenges, the world’s middle-classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest.”

— UK Ministry of Defence report: 'The DCDC Global Strategic Trends Programme 2007-2036’
(Third Edition) p.96, March 2007

As I've said, many, many times, -and this validates it-, their structure, like ours, (actually it's a different level of the same system ) is, 'clinical, methodical, and goddamn systemic'. They knew this was coming because the know what their doing. They have industrial psychologist's and sociologist's and other scientist's and whole organisations who crunch the numbers. Such as think tanks like Tavistock Institute, Rand Corporation, the Hudson Institute etc. to control the mental plantation.

Shaking it here, Boss...

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Aug 11 2011 23:56 utc | 28

There's something else Cameron & Co have conveniently forgotten; the proud British tradition of having fun by engaging in soccer hooliganism which, if memory serves, often transcended education and income barriers.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 12 2011 3:26 utc | 29

@Hoarsewhisperer - good point - in the the one bigger looting I once observed most where in it because they had FUN doing it. A factor missing in most of the analysis.

Posted by: b | Aug 12 2011 17:02 utc | 30

The "authorities" have adopted a policy of eviction from council dwellings if a (subordinate) family member is convicted of a rioting crime. One wonders what long-term goal a policy of blind retribution and collective punishment is supposed to achieve? There is talk of imposing a lien on the value of freehold properties where eviction is impossible/impractical.

The West's policy of blind retribution in Afghanistan (and Iraq - as illustrated in Wikileaks' Collateral Murder video) is the main factor in uniting, and stiffening the resolve of, the Afghans to evict the invaders. It helps underline the fact that the War on Terror cranks invaded Iran and Afghanistan for no better reason than to kill people who didn't want them there.
Shades of Gaza?

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Aug 13 2011 1:36 utc | 31

if, in foreign countries, you have a history of stirring up trouble that can be used as an excuse to impose your will on those countries' governments and population, i spose the same tactic will work at home.

need scapegoats because your oil production is faltering, and your economy is being propped up by bullshit and black magic as it's looted? sweat, GI... just stir up unrest amongst the wogs, and the wogs can be blamed for everything.

we're all wogs, now... at least those of us who dont have enough juice to loot... and there's always gonna be enough hotheads in the wog ranks to be susceptible to manipulation.

time to crank up the kibble factories, kibble dispensers --free kibble!-- on every street corner, kibble laced with the appropriate drugs... some to make you passive, some to drive you crazy enough to commit acts that can be used as an excuse for reprisals.

we're talking full spectrum doominance, here, and it isnt as if big pharma isnt in on the gag.

Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 2:30 utc | 32


Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 2:50 utc | 33


Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 3:12 utc | 34


Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 4:05 utc | 35

Feral capitalism hits the streets./A>

Posted by: Biklett | Aug 13 2011 4:58 utc | 36


Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 5:50 utc | 37


Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 6:46 utc | 38


Posted by: groundresonance | Aug 13 2011 6:50 utc | 39

@groundresonance - You made eight comments within 4 hours all of them unrelated to the theme of the thread but random rants about whatever.

All now deleted.

I do not want such monologues on my blog. Go elsewhere.

As this happened after two warnings, you are now banned.

Posted by: b | Aug 13 2011 9:04 utc | 40

This post, picked up at Naked Capitalism, may properly belong on the Open Thread, but it does seem to me to relate to the riots in England: diatribe against 'intellectual subterfuge' and paean to Icelandic grit. Much of what the author says resonates clearly, but the basic concept of "self-organization" seems to me to be a bit too vague. Others may differ with my view.

Posted by: Hannah K. O'Luthon | Aug 13 2011 10:23 utc | 41

Hannah, That was an OK article but a bit elliptic I feel. It fleshes out a little what I was rambling about - the clash, or even contradiction, between the supposed ‘free market’ (a matter of pride for England) and a heavy, very oppressive, very controlling State apparatus. (The US is in a similar position in some ways, with the main difference being that the US has a submerged State apparatus - it is invisible - whereas in England it is more transparent and better known by citizens.)

As for self organization, it implies something new, different, some emergence, a sub-system that detaches and takes on autonomy. That is why the comparison between Iceland and rioters in England doesn’t take off: the point is that Iceland had a system that could react the way it did ..300K people gathered on the coast and rather isolated and prideful...etc.

Posted by: Noirette | Aug 13 2011 16:32 utc | 42

The "authorities" have adopted a policy of eviction from council dwellings if a (subordinate) family member is convicted of a rioting crime. One wonders what long-term goal a policy of blind retribution and collective punishment is supposed to achieve?

As Hoarsewhisperer says (31), the sickest part of this affair is that Cameron wants families to be evicted from publicly-owned properties, where a minor member of the family has taken part in the looting. One such eviction has already started.

It is not a question of publicly subsidised apartments. Subsidies stopped more than 20 years ago. The occupants are paying commercial rents. But it is true that the contracts allow the local authorities to do this, if you push the interpretation quite far.

Can you imagine this? A whole family is put out on the street, just because an adolescent kid made a fool of himself.

It's the kind of reprisal that that the adolescent kids of the British government do.

Posted by: alexno | Aug 13 2011 19:29 utc | 43

The comments to this entry are closed.