At last, a clear indication of the neoliberal revolution coming to an end (How Britain fell out of love with the free market, 5 August). I wish it were more clearly stated by politicians and in the questions journalists ask them. It is high time to denounce those behind the whole scheme – one which is so obviously leading to many tragedies of the commons.
The academic (Friedman, Hayek, Buchanan et al), political (Reagan, Thatcher …) and philosophical basis, with its misanthropic view that everyone is essentially selfish, is bust. The hypocrisy of that idea is astounding, the more so that it gained such following and influence, as every one of those who supported it had families, lived in communities, joined clubs and depended on others every day.
The author of this letter, one Robin Le Mare seems not to understand the difference between voluntary collectivism, which is where clubs and such fall and forced government mandated collectivism. The former is fine – we all engage to a certain extent. I certainly do. What I object to and vigorously so – is the enforced kind. Especially that which leads to the common good. Who decides what that is? And how is it enforced? All I can say is this – I want nothing to do with Mr Le Mare’s collective. I want nothing to do with his vile “common good” for there is no such thing. I decide what is in my best interests and I decide whom I will assist according to what is happening in my life at the time. I remain firmly an individualist. I will never consent to the kind of state enforced collectivism espoused by totalitarians such as Robin Le Mare.
Failed models need to be denounced and rejected, but that is inadequate without a clear statement of alternatives.
Socialism is the one massively failed ideology that has plagued mankind for the past century. There is an alternative – one that works. Unfortunately, government after government is too weak and cowardly to try it. Meanwhile, will Mr Le Mare please denounce and reject the failed evil of socialism?
Erm …
I’m going to disagree, quite strongly.
You seem to confusing very mild “socialism” ( I will explain ) with the religion of communism or even strong socialsim
“The Common Good” applies to anything for the general benefit, paid for out of taxation, such as;
Roads, the NHS ( or any similar service) or municipal rubbish-collection.
Be very careful what you wish for
Now, then: are the examples I gave “socialism” or not?
Some nutters in the USA would say “yes”, but lots of peoplehere would say “no”
Um, err …..
It’s lefties who seek to deliberately confuse with their never-ending no true Scotsman nonsense as they refuse to acknowledge the failure of their ideology.
And it’s not hard to spot the cycle: ridiculous praise, then propaganda, and when the truth comes out, well, it was never really socialism in the first place. See everywhere from the USSR to Venezuela to Tony Blair.
“are the examples I gave “socialism” or not?”
You said you’d explain but you haven’t. You haven’t offered any definitions or clarification. Just a pathetic, leading attempt to trick.
But to answer your question: yes. And all would be better provided by the market.
If you really want to get semantic, you could say they’re examples of political socialism within a capitalist economy. And that’s, ironically, the only way any form of socialism can effectively work – in a capitalist economy. Because capitalism provides the wealth that socialism can’t.
And even then, if things tip too far towards socialism, its trademarks of poverty, misery, starvation, and mass murder won’t be long in arriving (and when they do, so to will the apologists with their “it was never really socialism” lies).
So what an amazing ideology. So dangerous, if not contained it can destroy countries. And people support it and cheer-lead for it.
The only thing it’s got going for it is it’s truly amazing propaganda.
“Um, err …..”
Um, err… what? What’s your point? Where’s your explanation? Get lost and take your vile ideology of hate and failure with you.
Hear hear.
Quote, “And all would be better provided by the market”
Lol, let’s go with that for a minute. Rubbish collection….so all of a sudden I have to pay a private company to collect my rubbish rather than have a small amount of my council tax used for that purpose. But I don’t think I need rubbish collection and I certainly am not going to pay the private rate for the job so instead, I decide that I will dispose of my own rubbish. Out comes my incinerator in the back garden and I proceed to burn all my rubbish. Now imagine, you are my next door neighbour and you can’t go outside due to the fumes from my incinerator. Tough luck kiddo. There’s feck all you can do about it. What a wonderful thing this free choice thing is.
This is covered by common law. Your neighbour would be able to take action against you for nuisance. So, not a problem.
Take action where? Courts? Can’t have them they are an instrument of the state paid for by taxpayers and therefore Socialist aren’t they? So are they going to be run by private enterprise as well? Congratulations…that is the first step on the road to real Fascism, the collusion of Corporate and State. I don’t know why some people just cannot admit that some things are better done on a national scale organised by the state and for the benefit of ALL….
Puerile strawman argument. I’m not going to waste my time responding to nonsensical logical fallacies.
Up to you but to anyone independent reading it comes across as code for I can’t/won’t answer that…
Nope. It’s a classic strawman argument. Try looking it up on Google. I will not waste time defending what I have not said.
That is the standard right-wing Libertarian (As opposed to Kropotkin left-wing libertarian ) argument …
Perfectly valid UNTIL YOU REALISE that the only people who can enforce this sort of thing are the rich & corrupt.
Dare I mention the US name “Koch” ??
Sure you can if you wear a tinfoil hat 😉
Common law has existed and worked perfectly well in this country sine the reign of Richard II.
Erlier than that, actually.
BUT it is still predominatly for the rich …
The poor or even the middle-income people usually can’t afford to “go to law” unless they have no alternative at all.
Guess how I know this?
Well, there was the avowedly socialist guvmint that was in power when I was born (1946) that later (1950) went to war with Communist-socialsit China/N Korea as part of a UN action.
Note thatr J Corbyn, utter fucwit, presumably includes that UN-backed war as not being a “just” one.
I presume from your hretoric you would like to see the NHS destroyed & the maintenance of the road system revert to parish boards, as per pre (approx) 1845? And no centralised water or electricity distribution systems, either?
All of thos “services” fall under the title of the common good.
Like any slogan, it can be misuse, 7 is & will be.
Watch who is saying whatever it is, & what theor actions are, rahtehr than thr rhetoric.
Otherwise you might be foolish enogiu to believe that christianity ia sabout peace & love, mightn’t you?
Do you take my drift?
Oops, bad typos there – please excuse
Yup.
“You seem to confusing very mild “socialism” ( I will explain ) with the religion of communism or even strong socialism”
It’s irrelevant what sort of socialism you start with, it always ends the same. Conform or perish. Mild socialism just takes a little longer to get there, but the end result is not in doubt.
“It’s irrelevant what sort of socialism you start with, it always ends the same. Conform or perish”
Indeed, even ‘national socialism’ (or ‘Brexit’ as we Brits have come to call it).
Riiiiiight…
NOT THIS FUCKING STRWMAN AGAIN
The Nazis were nothing to do with socialism in the same way that the DDR was not nor the DPRK had/have anything to do with democracy, in spite of the word being used.
WHAT THEY DO tells you, not the name
No, it doesn’t.
The Attlee guvmint I referred to earlier & Harold Wilsundra (Old Private Eye Joke) were both voted out of office – as was Blair.
So it does not alwyas happen.
Holland was very recently voted out in France, too ….
Um, err ….. Greg….…
In the UK, Roads are County Council managed (Apart from the Motorway network – that’s Highways Authority last I looked, run under the auspices of an NGO). Municipal Rubbish Collection generally at District Council or City Council level – mostly subcontracted out to the private sector. The NHS a collection of (Semi) Independent Health Management Trusts. A mix of commercial and trust structured institutions. Hardly examples of any form of Socialism.
Ultimately, they are all centrally controlled, which is the hallmark of socialism. I can’t arrange with SITA when they will collect my rubbish, nor can I ask them to call more frequently. Likewise, the NHS and roads, as the consumer, I have little, if any control over the service provided.
Both L-R & Bill S
In some parts of the USA they have no rubbish collection – people do take it to an unregulated dum, or burn it.The total cost is much greater & the environmental cost is also greater.
Thje are times when co-operation is better, actually.
Sometimes.
Horses for courses – a phrase ideologues on both sides should remember, but don’t
So what? See my comment above. This is manageable.
Yes, but it costs lots more, as well as dumping poisons into the water=-systems
Margaret Thatcher got it right with her (deliberately?) mis-understood claim that ‘there is no such thing as society’. Society is an abstract concept, that describes how individuals interact. The trouble with socialists is that they want to make society real as designed by them. Unfortunately for us that means that the people, (individuals), have to be shaped to act as bricks in their construction, (‘Girls you will be CEOs, Engineers etc. but not mothers').
There is only, “no such thing as society” in the mind of a selfish idiot that thinks he/she can live in a vacuum. MT also said that, “the problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money”………While making a fortune as an MP and PM taking other peoples money. The cognitive dissonance with Thatcher was astounding.
Another strawman argument.
I’d be interested in where you think I have misrepresented someone’s argument in both this bit or the one above. In the one above (I don’t want to continue posting up there as it gets all squeezed down into a tiny unreadable box) Greg T mentions, “roads, the NHS (or any similar service) and municipal rubbish collection…be careful what you wish for”….Andrew responded by saying, ” But to answer your question; yes. And all would be better provided by the market.” Now the crux of the matter is whether you see the Police, Courts, Prison service etc as a “similar service” or not. I do and therefore refute your claim of misrepresentation. It’s there in black and white.
Anyone reading it can see it’s a misrepresentation and a fucking massive one at that. It’s sixth form debating tactics. No one has ever suggested no state and no one has ever suggested no system of law. Neither of these are socialist concepts. Andrew is perfectly correct – everything Greg mentioned can be provided by private functions and probably a damned sight better than the state. The law is clearly a different matter – your attempts to draw a comparison simply do not hold up and are, frankly, a childish attempt at reducto absurdum. Well, it won’t wash.
However, my strawman comment was directed at your deliberate attempt to twist Jim’s statement regarding society above. It’s a textbook strawman argument as is the left’s regular misquoting of Margaret Thatcher’s comments on the matter – you merely repeated the offence even after it has been pointed out. Please stop using logical fallacies, they are becoming tedious.
I MISSED THAT
Andrew is either seriously deluded or a deliberate liar.
We know that single-payer health systems, around the planet are both cheaper & much more effective than the US non-system which is the only comparator.
A health system, for a whole couintry will not, ever, be provided more effectively by a “market” – if only because it will be rigged & cartel-ised.
For evidence drill down the Health section of the website “Our World in Data”
The French system is not a single supplier system – having within it, both state and private provision along with an internal market and works far better than the shambles we have. So, yes, I would dismantle the NHS given half the chance.
Yes & no
The French system is mostly single-payer but, as you say, “private” is also included.
GOOD
But, those who wish to dismantle the NHS here want a US-style system.
Err – no thank you.
Also, PLEASE consult the health pages of “Our World in Data” ??