What happens when the democratic process in the Western world fails to deliver elected administrations that can run the State and preserve the Nation on behalf of her people? In the past the solution to the problem of failing States was revolution of a gory and bloody kind. In Britain and the US and elsewhere, whole Nations of people are struggling to find a party who is capable of reflecting the complex demands of the 21st in the way their Nation is run by their State. Nations of individuals all of whom have different demands and expectations, be they social or economic are thus being let down by their State. Just look at the long term unemployed to see this failure at its most stark.
The problem for the Labour party is that it is a party of the Socialist State, not a party of the individual. Marx stated clearly a socialist’s job was to wrestle power, wealth and privilege off of the capitalist and create a socialist State. This is basically what we have now, a State that since WWII has introduced a system of state ownership, regulation and welfare. However Marx also said the story concludes with the State “withering away”. This withering away is the transfer of power to the people. The Labour Party can’t do it because socialism makes it is a party of the State. It would have to abolish itself in the process of passing “power to the people”. So a State run by a Labour Party under Corbyn will consolidate power not give it away….Scary stuff if you listen to them ranting on.
The Tories are not wedded to the notion of the state running the Nation like an expensive ideological experiment as are Labour. However their pragmatism maintains the status quo in a fast moving world. Thus we are left tottering on the kerb as the rest of the world shoots by. The Tories need to grasp that being less ideological, it is they who are best placed to deliver more power to the Nation’s People. But they are unlikely to do so for similar reasons to Labour. Preservation of the party brand.
To save the British Nation, Labour need to get over themselves as a party and hand power to the people not their party and the Tories need to realise that the future of Britain and the survival of her values is more important than even the Tory Party.
Dramatic things happen over centuries not decades. Since Britain consolidated into a “Nation” it has been run by something called the “State”. From time to time the “State” under performs whether that is a Plantagenet king or a whole system like the Feudal System. When that happens like today there is pressure for change and then a revolution.
Today we have a “State” that is indebting us. Each one of our two main parties wants to take over the “State” and run it badly, on our behalf. One party is well intentioned but committed to managing the “State” with no real understanding of what is wrong with it, the other wants to crank up the debt and control our lives on a scale unknown for hundreds of years. There is a real prospect that being a Tory or a Person of Jewish faith could become illegal the Corbyn “left” hate them so much.
What happens when the “State” has bankrupted the Nation and has consolidated its power. We don’t know yet, it will probably involve anti semitism and misogyny amongst other delights, but we know how it happens and it is happening now. Support a Blue Revolution and halt the decline.
The Labour Party conference was typical of a reunion of old left wing windbags. Living the dream of “smashing the hated Tories” decades after the Tories stopped being a threat to anyone but themselves. Corbyn really believes he has set the country on fire with his skilled orations. In reality though his supporters have no idea what is really going on, who is shafting who and what they should do about it. So they buy into the simplicities of 1970’s “socialism” because it is a familiar blast from the past for many, and beats returning to pot smoking or thinking for yourself. Get the megaphone out and chant “what do we want…..the Tories out…..when do we want it……NOW!” It’s a great way to stay fit and get some fresh air in middle age. For the Facebook generation it’s simply about shifting their debt onto the States books.
One thing Comrade Corbyn did get right however was that politics has drifted the “centre ground” to the left….He isn’t totally stupid. However the Tories having moved left don’t really have the intellectual heft to understand why they have had to do that. They think it is because Corbyn’s ideas are so compelling, to stand any chance of power in the future the gravity of politics has to move towards Corbyn. Of course this is nonsense.
Politics moved the centre ground to the right under the hated Blair and stayed right through Brown and Cameron emerging still right wing but failing under Mrs May. Up until the managerial Mrs May, there was a beautiful planetary alignment which saw a rather silly ideology consolidate around a handful of right wing simplicities. Most notable of these simplicities was a belief in the power of the liberated free market to deliver economic and social justice through personal and government debt.
Of course not only could an unregulated free market not deliver social justice, the economics of this system were brutal too, as the bottom 50% of the population saw their jobs disappear abroad, their wage levels pushed to the minimum wage by waves of unskilled migration, and their personal debt rocket to pay for an empty meaningless lifestyle which subsidised the top 50% with income from the poorer peoples personal debt.
This people is the most immoral system ever created by man. A system where the poor are forcibly indebted by their government to pay for a wealthy elite. It is slavery in all but name.
However the miserable saga doesn’t end there. Blair and Cameron and Osborne were convinced that this post industrial economic system would work. But of course it has to feed some kind of value in to support the debt and that value was the fluctuating value of stock and property which even when cleverly packaged as a “collateralised debt obligation” still failed the sniff test. Hence the aftermath in 2007/08
So with the western economic model still failing under the assumed auspicious conditions of the right….the only possible option for the average person is that there maybe something on the left that can sort out the obvious fact that Anglo Saxon economics is finished. And so we have Jeremy and his happy band of conned and deluded students and overweight 1970’s and 1980’s student activists complete with megaphones tempted back to perform angry protest. A sort of new Angry Brigade, all primed and ready to do business sorting out the system. But this will be by getting the poor old taxpayer into more debt whilst looking after the interests of the Labour party, its supporters and interest groups.
So what does Blue Revolution make of all this. Well we believe the western model is to coin a phrase a house built on sand. There is no way of avoiding the stark truth of that and so we need to stop talking politics based on parties and have a democracy based on realism, not short term party self interest.
We can’t afford the modern British state. The political Parties all want to run the State but they can’t, it’s unaffordable, unfit for purpose and needs massive reform. They can’t do that reform. The Left wing and the right wing have no suggestions as to how we can save our country and our culture so our country and culture are seriously at risk from them.
Oh and people wonder why there is an increase in Anti Semitism in the Labour Party. Apart from the religious composition of Northern Constituencies the reason is that they know that their policy of debt and more debt won’t solve the West’s or Britains problems and will only make matters significantly worse. Who do you blame when you have actually made matters worse, perhaps existentially worse. Well you don’t blame yourself or the people who vote for you…you blame mankind’s Shylock, Fagin or money lender….you blame the Jews. It was never your borrowing that is to blame….it was their lending! That is even if Jewish business still run the banks. Our guess is they got out of banking years ago!
So what of the party conferences. Well they have both reflected the shift left from Blairs shift right. But neither party has an answer as the answer is less of them and more of a State run democratically by people with the values morals and skills to do it properly in everyone’s interest. Not simply the short term party interest!
There was a time when to use a Marxist phrase politics was a petit-bourgeois activity. The players were like bankers and lawyers mere flunkies of the capitalist. At that time the political system was set up to efficiently manage the capitalist economy and ensure the competing needs of the big players, the landowners and men of capital, could have their differences reconciled without taking up arms. The whole process worked so well that by the 1750’s the British Empire spanned the globe bringing trade that would eventually liberate people from poverty and disease.
The 17th and 18th centuries were the period when a free people and a free capitalist class drove up economic value in such vast amounts that London was so wealthy it became a city of expensive architectural marvels. The Law Courts in London, the Naval HQ at Greenwich from where the Empire was policed and the end of slavery enforced, and of course Parliament itself. The Capitalist political model was adopted elsewhere in the world, notably the UAS signifying the success of the Bourgeois revolution…..or as it is known in Britain the “Glorious Revolution”.
Politicians were there to promote and protect this capitalist model and secure its future. The Monarch has by this time acquired a purely symbolic function and has discharged this role competently right up to the present day. And long may that part of the State continue. It is the least problematic part of the British State by a country mile.
The problem is that the capitalist model is now defunct! Lets stop there and think about that. How is the capitalist system defunct? Well to be capitalist, capitalism has to produce economic value by combining things like land and labour thus creating Goods and resources that can be traded for money. This money builds up as wealth. This wealth enables the rich to pay taxes and the state to function in the interests of the economic players the Capitalist and Landowners, and by the 20th century the workers too. If we accept this definition of capitalism, capitalism has had its heyday and has been replaced by the debt dependent “free market”.
The free market was an important element of the Capitalist system. Based on Contract, Choice and Consent it allowed “trade” to flourish. However without the economic underbelly of “capitalism” it has spawned a virulent form of immoral consumerism driven by debt. This consumerism is unsustainable, planet destroying and will eventually, like capitalism itself fail spectacularly. When this happens, and unless we prepare for a properly democratic “managed decline” involving ordinary people making decisions about their future, we are likely to lose the elements of Contract, Choice and Consent that were the kingpin of the last three hundred years of trade, freedom and democracy and find ourselves governed by an indifferent elite. Worse than now trust us!
So how do our modern western politicians fit into this doomsday scenario? Well as we said at the beginning they were originally there to promote the interests of the bourgeois economy and that bourgeois economy paid for the state and therefore paid them and those who administered the State.
Now of course the State pays for them with no bourgeois economy paying for the state. The State pays for almost everything else too. To meet its obligations the State relies on debt.
With the State indebting us up to our ears and ordinary taxpayers indebted up to their ears too, paying taxes on a salary that relatively speaking would have been too low to tax by 18th century standards, we are all paying hand over fist to keep a political, public sector and “free market elite” in well remunerated work but for no discernible reason. Frankly the old the young the taxpayer the planet and the indebted can no longer afford to support this outdated system.
Blue Revolution says “move over State elite and let the people take over, it’s our country and it’s our planet”.
The Autumn of discontent is a worthy enterprise for well intentioned students who having a youthful belief in the benign intentions of the State want to “take the fight to the politicians” in the hope that politicians are part of the solution.
In reality of course machine politicians are the problem. Serried ranks of party hacks all having one eye on their careers and the other eye on the opposition party’s activities, whilst the rest of us are ignored or “managed” to ensure the various right and left vested interests are protected and promoted. It is easy to see why people can be beguiled by politicians, and their parties, because the only way onto politics is via one. But being part of a party requires a certain amount of abandoning of principles and promoting “groups” who are sympathetic with the party in question.
Students are a case in point. Student debt keeps the left wing educational establishment in work whilst transferring wealth from poor families to universities either as government debt (paid for out of taxation) or student loans. Other examples are the future pauperisation of the future young via payments for elderly care out of the elderly’s current wealth. How long before the State decides that in addition to covering elderly care out of inheritable wealth student loans can be paid out of actual inherited wealth. The State and its new industries like elderly care, education, child welfare, domestic abuse and crime all need paying for and tax can and will only go so far.
Young people should realise that socialists just want to turn the state into the Nation’s employer of choice for well…. left wing intellectual people who have no connection with the real working class. The bill of course is picked up by the poor old workers. The Conservatives want to do the right thing but in a system that can’t and has rarely ever delivered the “right thing”. They will and currently are doomed to fail. Corbyn is right about that.
We offer this warning to the young and old alike; just remember that your interests and the interests of the planet are not aligned with the interests of the State. The State is an 18th century institution designed to prevent civil war and to manage opposition using a crude binary model of government and opposition. In the two or three hundred years it has existed in its modern form it has done well to promote vested interests on left and right. Those interests are no more about ordinary people’s interests now than they have ever have been before.
Socialism and Corbyn’s “left” are as much part of the State as they are unashamedly about “the Labour Party”and its 1840’s values. They are “socialists”. Socialism is not about liberating the people it is about the party, and delivering the Party’s programme.
Only Blue revolution wants to bring together ordinary people in a new politics for the 21st century and re build Britain from the neighbourhood up! Not Parliament down.
Well it’s not feudalism? What do you call it when the ordinary tax-payer subsidizes labour? well it isn’t socialism? So what is it called when the ordinary taxpayer subsidizes capital? Well its not capitalism and it is probably the biggest rip off in world history. The land, the poor and the planet, are having to pay the price!! We need a planet saving, freedom promoting and capital preserving Blue Revolution!
This issue of the relationship between society and its means of production is elemental to our understanding how and why the world is as it is today and the likely success of the competing ideologies that are starting to wrestle for influence or supremacy in a world made fluid by the end, through bankruptcy, of the anglo/US two hundred year old trading hegemony.
How does it work? Well Feudalism is the theft of land value by an elite. The system has some legitimacy because only the elite are capable of maintaining order and thus making this economic model work. However once the land is subsidised by government it marks the end of land related authority. Should the land be subsidized? probably not! But neither should it simply be monetised by house building. This turns land value into cash for the few and not for the pleasure of the many.
Beyond land based economic models we move to Capitalism and its massive productive output. Workers paid wages to enable them to create economic value for the capitalists. The Capitalists have supremacy. The State and the wage bill is paid by them but they still get a good return and political power. Socialism by contrast takes much of the Capitalists value and turns it into state expenditure. Subsidizing labour to the tune of health, welfare and pensions expenditure. Note it is the Capitalist who is paying the bill for welfare on the whole, either directly or via the taxation levied on their workers.
Finally the end of this civilised model comes when capitalism can’t support the state or the States “socialist” aspirations and also can’t support itself as an economic system (i930’s then 1980’s and 2007/8 and finally 20??). At that point the Capitalist system is essentially dead and needs putting down but that could lead to social chaos. So the elite seizing an opportunity to make money put it on life support. That life support is a regime of taxpayer funded government and personal debt. The capitalist system is now no more than a valueless free market lantern show of of some of capitalism’s past glories such as “profit”. “Profit” is used to justify wealth for those who consider their wealth to be “legitimately” earned. There is no “legitimate” wealth in this system as the system produces no real value based wealth just debt.
The problem as we at Blue Revolution continually argue, is that the values (contract, choice and consent) that two hundred years ago transformed feudalism into capitalism and the values that transformed capitalism into socialism in Britain (health, and welfare), will likely disappear when the final embers of the unsustainable free market go cold. Then what?
Look around the world and you see nations engaging in a kind of verbal warfare. Better of course than actual warfare but pointless and limiting. The problem is or so it seems to us, too many countries fail to understand their shared value base. They, for one reason or another, prefer to obsess about difference rather than what is similar or familiar. The reason is probably because they came to where they are via different routes.
Just as you can “hack” across the English countryside to get to Sheffield, you can also take the motorway. Both journeys end up at the same place but the experience of getting there will be very different. So like Russia and the West we have arrived at a 21st century socioeconomic system that is broadly the same; Debt based and consumer driven. This is currently where all western type nations stand. Nations who have, by dint of capitalist exploitation or exploitation by the industrialised state, got to a point where working people have acquired a level of freedom which is different from cultures which are for other reasons locked into a mediaeval “dark ages”. North Korea, Saudi Arabia and most of the Middle East, are feudal systems propped up by wealth controlled by a state elite who ruthlessly control power. No good being an outspoken soldier in North Korea or an outspoken woman is Saudi. This would be too much for the “state”. Death would await.
The perversity of why the West is as it is, is to us quite simple. Before you can equalise people (moving away from gender or race based discrimination for example) you have to prolatarianise them. It is the process of prolatarianisation, be it private capitalist or state capitalist systems like Russia, which drives the demand for equality. Industrialisation simply needs workers, not male workers or female workers, black workers or white workers but workers! Eventually Gay workers etc. Countries that have not industrialised and have not therefore prolatarianised cannot deliver freedom and equality. It simply isn’t in the cultural vocabulary for them to do so. So invariably you end up with a North Korea or Saudi Arabia, Myanmar or wherever. It is just the way it is. Look at a woman in a Burka and you don’t see a person defined by her work you see a woman defined by her gender. Scary stuff if you are a woman on the left wing of politics!
Now this reflects a problem for the West in that we no longer have a “capitalist” system, reinforcing capitalist principles of contract, choice and consent.
Capitalism, before it morphed into the ghastly debt based “free market”, had spawned one very significant but ignorant and ungrateful offspring, namely socialism. Socialists don’t seem to see that the wealth spent by socialist governments came from capitalism, wealth they spent on welfare systems and social reform.
Socialists somehow think that this bounteous wealth came from the actions of socialist governments alone and not from the actions of industry and workers. It’s ignorance makes it careless about the freedoms that have flowed from capitalism. The freedom for women to work, to be part of the political system, to freely marry divorce and have lives determined by them and not the state or their gender, is thanks, not to socialism alone, but to the principles laid down in early capitalist society. Without those principle socialism would have had neither the vocabulary nor the money to effect real change in peoples lives via health, welfare and personal rights.
However modern socialism with its state managed obsessions about diversity and its embrace of all things anti capitalist, is now in danger of promoting systems of rights which are pre capitalist and pre socialist. Rights defined by gender predominantly. Today socialism provides a fertile home, particularly in the United Kingdom,for islamists, misogynists, anti Semites and homophobes to flourish. The sad thing is most modern socialists including our old friend Jeremy Corbyn are too ill informed about socialisms roots to realise it, or to understand how they contribute to it…..as too are most of their voters.
Only a Blue Revolution can take ordinary workers on a progressive journey into the future, preserving our hard fought for workers rights and freedoms. Sadly the modern left will simply bankrupt us, ball us up and drop our culture into the dustbin of history, followed shortly by socialism itself!
No of course not. In 21st Century Britain there should be no issue with this. Baroness Warsi would make a great foster mum. She is bright ambitious, well connected and we assume able to square the rights of post industrial westerners with her own possible faith based reservations about a range of western identity pre occupations like sexuality or gender reassignment.
Baroness Warsi, however, was not the foster mum in the recent Uk “Times” story. The foster mum concerned was photographed shrouded in black. The purpose of this traditional dress is that it ensures women observe very strict codes of modesty. This is irrespective of how the woman might feel about this, or indeed how a foster child may view it. The collective pressure of her community and the disapproval of others ensures compliance by te woman concerned.
No little girl “Christian” or otherwise should be encouraged to see women as an object of adolescent like male lust. An object that should be shrouded to prevent community disapproval, punishment or in the case of white girls in Rochdale etc the most appalling and degrading abuse.
Are there any other issues that arise from this sad story about cultural incompatibility? Well yes. Taking a traditional view of a woman’s need for modesty should prompt the local Social Services team to ask further probing questions about the wider rights of women and girls and perhaps how the prospective foster carer views the rights of others like gay people or apostates etc (we should ask similar questions before granting citizenship).
We suspect that these questions are not asked. If they were we suspect that too many religiously observant foster carers would be considered highly unsuitable, and that seems to be Ok as long as their faith is Christan or rather non-Muslim. It’s Ok to have a go at Christians or others, they don’t hit back. This illustrates the point we at Blue Revolution make all the time and that is that in the land of the hard left London Boroughs, the general concern for individual rights including rights under the broad banner of “identity politics” can be set aside in deference to the Islamic faith. But why?
A recent programme on BBC radio 4 covered the subject of Princess Diana. A feminist author took the view that Diana was a practitioner of “victim feminism”. We are not experts on feminism but it sounds like victim feminism is based on the idea that if you claim to be abused, discriminated against and demeaned you have a right to be angry, demand approval, forgiveness, and support, in essence, given “permission” to behave how you like.
Is this what is happening within our western culture with our reaction to the orthodox observance of Islam? It may be that there are two battles going on against the West by Islamists and Islamophiles. One is fought out in the courts by Islamophile human rights Barristers all claiming special status for Islam as a persecuted and victimised faith. Whilst in Parliament the Civil Service and numerous Council chambers “victim” status is established for Islam scaring social workers, police officers and the like into acquiescence on a range of its cultural peculiarities.
The other battle goes on on the streets. On the streets where the cause of Islamophobia has its roots, where Islamism shows its aggressive and murderous side along side it’s general incompatibility with modern values linked to the rights of the individual. There is little if any Contract, Choice, and Consent in orthodox Islam and you can’t expect there to be. These are western notions forged in the white heat of capitalism and industrialization, which are alien to cultural Islam.
The lessons from this sorry tale of the little foster child are that whilst we should not in post industrial 21st century Britain be worried about anyone being fostered by anyone of faith, unfortunately, we have to be when that faith is orthodox observant Islam. Practitioners of orthodox Islam in almost all cases will hold beliefs that contradict a whole range of individual rights identity rights, and modern values. Beliefs that certainly won’t be compatible with the Human Rights Act such as the basic right of gay men to have a life or a woman to be sexually liberated from control by her “guardian” male.
With the skillful application of victim status by Human Rights Barristers within the British legal system and with a left wing Islamophle local government bureaucracy more than happy to champion these “faith victims” above all others, the dialogue with practitioners of orthodox Islam is silenced. We need a grown up conversation, not about Islam but about the values people bring to roles like fostering. The lack of this dialogue is what fuels Islamophobia. Shame on the establishment for letting the people down again!
All societies need to possess two basic characteristics, the ability to create economic value as well as social coherence. In a nut shell the ability to feed and water themselves and the ability to live within their means and maintain social order. The creation of value is an economic activity that taps into the cohesive society to provide the labour necessary to survive as a population and thrive as a culture.
In the Western world, however, we no longer see the need to do this. Because we can maintain utterly incoherent societies and pay for them with a mixture of Wizard of Oz-like financial jiggery-pokery combined with some Alice in Wonderland economics. This is the system we at Blue Revolution call Secularwesternism. It is the prevalent ideology of the Western world. We all buy into it and governments are too scared or stupid to know how to change it or change our appetite for it and its unsustainable debt funded gobbling up of the planet’s resources. It is the most damaging and unsustainable ideology that has ever evolved and it will collapse leaving economic and social devastation in its wake. The western characteristics (Contract, Choice, and Consent) upon which democracy is founded, forged by Capitalism and extended by left-leaning capitalist governments to more and more people will disappear in a trice.
There are already those religious fanatics who can see the weakness of Western society and the shameful economic model that props it up and believe they can bomb us back into what is for them a more coherent “dark-ages”, but for us would be a Sharia inspired return to a pre 18th, 17th or even 16th Century world of prejudice and discrimination. Assuming, of course, you could maintain anything that resembled a “State”.
Unfortunately for the devout Muslim with all their laudable devotions and traditional garb Sharia offers nothing “progressive” to the West, or anywhere for that matter. In this respect, it is no different to from the Old Testament. Islamism will stop Western progress in its tracks. But then Secularwesternism is doing the same thing but in a different way.
In addition to Islamism as an ideology jockeying to topple Western hegemony, we have the left wing getting in on the act. Now “the left” is an interesting hotchpotch of often incoherent ideas which have little basis in the economic reality of the Western world. So in China (and to some extent Russia), we have State Capitalism. This is the Capitalist System grafted onto an essentially feudal state. This is possible because unlike in industrializing Britain where Capitalism deposed feudalism confining it in the West to the historical dustbin, China can run the two systems in parallel.
In Britain, we have a collection of well-intentioned Mumsnetters and students who support Corbyn, the man who gives a well-meaning and harmless gloss to a party of Leninists, Stalinists anti-Semites, and Misogynists. The Corbyn Labour party is all about creating a Leninist like “Vanguard” (Momentum) seizing power on behalf of the “workers” and then re-ordering the “State” with a Stalinist like grip to deliver a new “socialist” society for the workers. It’s a horrible thought for us ordinary workers as it would turn Britain into a kind of bureaucratic hellhole, with workers, working to provide status and taxpayer-funded debt based wealth to an aggressive party elite. Rights would give way to the grand plan until the economy went pop.
The worst part of the Labour model is its complete lack of economic literacy. Unlike the Islamist who can see the absence of real social and economic value creation in the West, the British left still thinks the West makes real value from its coffee shops, restaurants and Malls selling tat, and that this value is controlled by a taxable business elite. No Guys, the West does not make real value based money it creates government and personal debt, and yes it does go to a business, banking and political elite that includes the Labour Party. And Labour would simply make the problem worse. Anti-austerity is the cause of the problem, not the solution. In the absence of real “re-appropriated value” to use a Marxist phrase, the only source of government finance apart from taxation is debt. The only way we can see to pay for schools and hospitals is to cut the cost of the State itself. But that, of course, is where the left wing gets their power from, now they have no Nationalised Industries to destroy. So we can’t expect a radical change there then!
On a more farcical note, we have the muddle of “Trumpism” which was (is) a nieve idea that somehow TPOTUS could order the US economy back to the 1950’s.
There is also Macronism, the nieve idea that Tony Blair was an enlightened thinker.
It is the workers, not the elite who will experience the horror of the West’s eventual demise and so far none of our pretenders to the Crown offers anything remotely realistic or in the case of Islamism humane. So rather than total economic and social collapse Blue Revolution offers its manifesto of increasing democracy in a shrinking state and an end to the rule of elites. Read our manifesto and join us before it is too late. As Karl Marx would say “raise your consciousness”.
More terrorism this week and threats of more transport-related atrocities in the UK. Every politician and pundit have identified the problem of the West’s lack of a narrative to counter-terrorism. The confusion over progressive values is that progressive values involve tolerating too readily regressive values such as anti Semitism or misogyny. In confusion over how to deal with primitive hate values are the so-called progressive left, an alliance of people who are united in hate of what is known as capitalism but which is, in reality, just a debt-funded “free market”. A free market that underpins the Wests freedoms.
The groups who hate this system either hate it because it confers rights to minorities they object to but for whom markets have developed to serve their needs, for example, the gay community. Or conversely, they don’t understand their own ideological confusion that the rights they enjoy, they enjoy because of the free market system they hate. This paradox is particularly marked on the left and partly explains Corbyn’s strange collection of incompatible ideological bedfellows.
This lack of coherence allows a moral fog to descend on the whole issue of individual rights and cultural expectations and confuses our understanding of the causes of the hatred of the West and thus impedes the West’s strategy or narrative for dealing with it. The modern liberal mind can’t square the circle.
Ok, so we will have a go. The West owes its existence like it or not, to capitalism, and in particular the 18th century and the codification of laws that created the legal freedom to contract choose and consent. All necessary for capitalism to work.
Before capitalism, we were bonded to masters. After capitalism, we were in a legal sense free people, the workers in the capitalist machine. The legal freedoms we acquired then and have extended since creating equality in law for minorities. These are missing from many of the world’s cultures today, particularly Islamic ones where gender, caste, tribe or wealth and status institutionalize discrimination. In these cultures, there is too often no right to contract freely to “follow your dreams”. They are pre-capitalist and pre-industrial. You only have to look at the culture of abuse and discrimination in Saudi Arabia to see how the pre-capitalist pre-industrial society works.
So the narrative for the West is to acknowledge the central role capitalism has played in creating our freedoms and whilst capitalism has its faults accept we owe our freedom to it and take pride in that. Even socialists can do this because without the productive energy of capitalism there would be no socialism. The west should then-champion the narrative of contract choice and consent and shame the bigots of whatever cultural hue into seeing themselves as regressive and at best 18th as opposed to the 21st century.
The bigots know that if you destroy the free market or we destroy it with debt, pre-industrial morals of control, coercion, and corruption become coherent. They the terrorists are trying to terrorize us back to their world so once again their values make sense.