The Political Thread

[The Legendary Shark]

Helping one another and devising your own solutions is not doing nothing. My comment on revolutions stands - they may improve things in the short term but you still end up with a ruling elite, just one of a different flavour.

[Frank]

Revolutions do work, of course (our country has had a couple of rather big ones that completely changed things) - but you can't just opt out of the system with some vague idea of establishing connections outside "authority". The people with all the police and guns will see to it that you can't.

The point made by the (excellent) article the Legendary Falcon linked to is that neither the English Civil War nor the Glorious Revolution made the slightest difference to the lives of ordinary people - most of whom would have lived their entire lives without ever learning that one toff in a wig had replaced another toff in a more elaborate wig.

The Industrial Revolution, however, happened largely without the permission of the landed gentry (despite their best efforts, in fact) and transformed every single aspect of ordinary peoples' lives. It's the potential for a revolution of that order and magnitude which Paul Mason sees in the replacement of capital by information as the coin of the realm.

[Hawkmumbler]

The Industrial Revolution, however, happened largely without the permission of the landed gentry (despite their best efforts, in fact) and transformed every single aspect of ordinary peoples' lives.

By enslaving millions of native African people! Hurray for the British Empire!

[Professor Bear]

Didn't the industrial revolution lead to the abolition of slavery?

[TordelBack]

Well they weren't picking all that cotton so it could sit in warehouses in its natural state. Slavery provided the vast private capital and many cheap raw materials for industrialisation - and industrialisation in turn was a key driver of the triangular trade.

[Spikes]

They're all at it..

[Famous Mortimer]

Revolutions do work, of course (our country has had a couple of rather big ones that completely changed things) - but you can't just opt out of the system with some vague idea of establishing connections outside "authority". The people with all the police and guns will see to it that you can't.

The point made by the (excellent) article the Legendary Falcon linked to is that neither the English Civil War nor the Glorious Revolution made the slightest difference to the lives of ordinary people - most of whom would have lived their entire lives without ever learning that one toff in a wig had replaced another toff in a more elaborate wig.

The Industrial Revolution, however, happened largely without the permission of the landed gentry (despite their best efforts, in fact) and transformed every single aspect of ordinary peoples' lives. It's the potential for a revolution of that order and magnitude which Paul Mason sees in the replacement of capital by information as the coin of the realm.

But they happened, though (as did the Industrial Revolution, as did the French, and so on) so saying "revolutions don't work" is being rather reductive, and quite wrong.

As soon as I can pay my mortgage with information, I'll be happy to talk to you about whatever odd plan this Paul Mason fellow has for the future.

[The Legendary Shark]

Um, he doesn't have a plan for the future. Perhaps you should read the article again?

[The Legendary Shark]

To us, it's an obscure shift of tax law. To the City, it's the heist of the century.

[Frank]

(N)either the English Civil War nor the Glorious Revolution made the slightest difference to the lives of ordinary people - most of whom would have lived their entire lives without ever learning that one toff in a wig had replaced another toff in a more elaborate wig.

But they happened, though (as did the Industrial Revolution, as did the French, and so on) so saying "revolutions don't work" is being rather reductive, and quite wrong.

Who they worked for is the point. 5 or 50 years after the English and French monarchs were violently replaced by another lot of absolute monarchs, how had the lives of their subjects changed (if at all)? 50 years after the Industrial Revolution, most Britons had gone from indentured servants, forced to work the land of their feudal lord, to literate, urbanite voters*.

You're taking the general's or the statesman's view of history, but those kind of musical chairs don't make much material difference to the lives ordinary people. The point of that excellent article is that all the presidents and potentates in charge today might still be in place tomorrow, but the nature of our lives and how we relate to each other could be transformed completely by the destruction of the power of capital by information.


* 1918-1928, if you were female. I'm not arguing the change from a feudal society to industrial capitalism was good or bad, just that it transformed the lives of ordinary people and the nature of society in ways regime change never has

[The Legendary Shark]

Bob on, Butch.

[I, Cosh]

Well they weren't picking all that cotton so it could sit in warehouses in its natural state. Slavery provided the vast private capital and many cheap raw materials for industrialisation - and industrialisation in turn was a key driver of the triangular trade.

Huzzah!

[ZenArcade]

The indirect effects of the Industrial revolution led to eventual universal sufferage; education acts; health care; basic workers rights etc. Z

[Professor Bear]

Labour leadership election unexpectedly mildly entertaining shockah!
What most sensible people assumed would be something akin to an office reshuffle in a bank has become a bit more lively when someone decided to let what looks like a passing maths teacher on the ballot for a laugh.  The maths teacher has dry opinions, notoriously never jokes or slings mud at political opponents, and this for some reason sent the right and left wing press completely fucking bananas saying no-one must ever vote for him ever because it would be the worst thing to happen in the history of ever ever ever - which in turn has caused thousands of people who weren't voting (or had abandoned the Labour Party years ago) to join the Labour Party so they can vote for the maths teacher, probably hoping to encourage the idea of a politician espousing anti-austerity sentiment, but to be honest it's most likely they just want to watch political vapor like Liz Kendall and Andy Burnham squirm.

[The Legendary Shark]

I get the feeling he won't be allowed to win and/or will meet with a perfectly innocent accident. Hope I'm wrong.