The Greedy And The Pompous Gather At Davos


If you have any doubts about the organised nature of the oligarchy that rules the Western world then read this Observer  article about the Davos meetings in Switzerland this last week.

The wealthy, privately educated elite that governs us were all gathered together to get their story straight and placate the bankers who are now portraying themselves as ‘victims’ of unreasonable mob venom!!!

Put this together with the G8, G20 and Bilderberg and you have a totally undemocratic and unaccountable world-wide oligarchy that ensures that the world is governed in the interests of the already rich and powerful.

The question is whether you think their interests are your interests? If you think your interests coincide with the interests of this elite, then you are likely to think that all this high-level schmoozing is perfectly reasonable and simply a necessary expression of an efficient form of Realpolitik. If however,  you think that governing the world in the interests of a tiny wealthy elite at the expense of the vast majority is morally abhorrent and politically unsustainable (see Tunisia & Egypt), then you might find these self-serving, vain-glorious gatherings of the greedy and the pompous as stomach churning and sinister as I do.

I Am Not A Number

Political and Philosophical Dispatches From An Individual Living In A Society

corporate democracy economics freedom left-wing libertarian managerialism moral philosophy politics radical socialist society

 

Advertisements

12 responses to “The Greedy And The Pompous Gather At Davos

  1. Chris, take a chill pill. Great changes have to evolve. At least it’s better that they evolve rather than explode. This is my first visit to your blog, but hopefully my comments will help steer you away from the commies and closer to the center of the road. As I visit this blog and become more familiar with your views I shall offer my brilliantly insightful comments. Until then don’t do anything rash.

  2. Hello Chris,
    Take a chill pill. It is better that great changes occur as a result of evolution instead of explosion. This is not only my first visit to your blog but to any blog, so I’m “learning the ropes.” As I study your website and gain a better understanding of your views I will offer insightful comments which will hopefully steer you from the Commies to a more centrist attitude. In the meantime try to stay out of trouble.

    • Hi Steve
      As you “learn the ropes” perhaps you will learn that patronising people on their own blog is not greatly appreciated. I think to ‘chill out’ while 37 million Americans live below the poverty line and a third of the world’s population live on the verge of starvation is frankly morally repugnant.

      I am sure that you are aware that the United States of America was created by a revolutionary war not by a process of political evolution. Indeed, a lot of Tom Paine’s, Common Sense, is devoted to explaining why at that time treason, in the form of large-scale, illegal, armed rebellion against the state, by the Americans was justified.

      The people of Egypt and Tunisia have had 30 years of political ‘evolution’ and it has got them nowhere. Only through mass demonstrations have they been able to bring about change. Incidentally, for the last 30 years the despotic & oppressive regimes in Tunisia & Egypt were politically and financially enabled by the United State of America – the rulers of the Land Of The Free don’t seem to think freedom is important for the people’s of Chile, Nicaragua, Argentina, Peru, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Egypt, Palestine, Zimbabwe, Pakistan……..the list of totalitarian ‘friends of America’ is endless.

      That being said I am not proposing revolution, I am proposing democracy. But not the sham democracy we have in the UK and you have in the US whereby the media (owned by the wealthy) portray the vested interests of the wealthy as the interests of us all. I am simply arguing for a form of democracy that recognises that business is just as capable of exploiting and oppressing ordinary men and women as is the state, and that in some cases citizens need the state to protect them from business. What I am arguing for is a form of managed economy that was adopted by your very own Franklin Delano Roosevelt in 1932 and was called the New Deal. This policy rescued the US from the ravages of the depression that resulted from the last major failure in the capitalist system, the Wall Street Crash. A similar form of Keynesian economics was adopted by the British Labour Party after WWII and led to a British Conservative Prime Minister, Harold Macmillan, to claim in 1957 that the British people had “never had it so good”.

      • Hello Chris, How’d you know who I was? You sneaky. I apologize. I wasn’t trying to patronize you or be disrespectful. I’m sorry. What I was trying to do was to precipitate a response and wow – look out. It was like opening one of those cans with all of the spring snakes that come shooting out. I can tell that you’re going to teach me a lot. You’ll be like Yoda. I must admit that it appears that our views are closer than you realize. I must also admit that I agree with most of what you say. But I won’t be a yes man. Discourse stimulates progress and I will be questioning what you say. Which brings up a question I have. Obviously you are a big fan of Thomas Paine. Assuredly Tom would have gladly thrown the King’s tea into Boston harbor and if he wasn’t present on the occasion of the Boston Tea Party then he most certainly was pissed that he missed the party. Now if Tom were alive today I propose that he would be a member of the present day Tea Party and maybe even Sarah Palin’s boyfriend.

      • Ok. Right. Now that’s more like it. Good stuff. The obvious issue with Tom Paine is that he is claimed by both the Left and the Right, certainly in Europe where the Left have definitely adopted him as a voice for freedom and the oppressed. From my Eorocentric viewpoint The Tea Party don’t seem to represent the oppressed masses or even Freedom – accept in the narrowest possible sense of freedom from state oppression? (See my blog ‘On Being Free In A Free Market’.)

        To my, not very well informed, eyes the Tea Party seem to represent a particular form of aggressive conservative thought that diminishes human suffering as the fault of the sufferer and glorifies a certain type of commercial/business success above all else.

        Paine makes an interesting distinction between Society and The State. He acknowledges the primary importance of humankind’s social nature and our psychological and pragmatic need to work together for common aims but argues that the State need not be the expression of that social action. I have some sympathy with that position but I do not see business as a progressive or liberating alternative.

        Paine was also writing before the Industrial Revolution and it is anybody’s guess how he would have reacted to the brutal exploitation of men & women by big business that led to the horrors of Dickensian London.

        Paine was also not a man of violence and in the French Revolution ended up in prison because he urged a more moderate non-violent approach. I am absolutely sure he would not have approved of the extreme rhetoric of violence indulged in by Palin and her friends at Fox News.

        The right wing in the USA has a terrifyingly intolerant and violent past. It was not trade unionists lynching black men in the South; it was not a socialist who shot Martin Luther King or Abraham Lincoln or blew up Oklahoma City. The violently oppressive tendencies of the American Right do not fill me with confidence that the Tea Party’s notion of ‘freedom’ would be recognised as such outside of the USA.

        I would argue that the democratic state as envisioned by Paine was a new form of government that was even to Paine uniquely legitimate – Paine was not against the democratic state, he was against those totalitarian states that had come before. The problem today is the same – Western representative government is democracy by name only. And there Palin and I might agree, after that I imagine we would disagree in almost every case on what to do about it.

  3. Thank you Chris. Apparently you forgive me for my seemingly disrespectful attitude. No disrespect was intended. I must apologize for being predisposed to deriving impish enjoyment from indulging in light-hearted “banter. ” The trick is knowing how far to go to earn a laugh and not a bloody nose. Nuf said.
    Now I must acknowledge that on some subjects you probably know more about the USA than I do, and I love to learn. So please bring me up-to-speed. I’m “all ears” or maybe “all eyes” is more fitting for the internet. Although I have been listening to and enjoying your Agitpop radio show. I listened to your Ben Kingsley interview last night. I want to hear your Dudley Sutton interview next. But getting back on track – I look forward to debating you here on your blog. First I need to absorb all of the information that you have served up so far. However, as John Paul Jones said, “I have not yet begun to fight.” I shall answer your broadsides in due time.

  4. OK. Looking forward to it.

  5. My Mom and I watched the BBC news tonight on our public station. It looks like, with luck, that things might progress to a peaceful conclusion if the Egyptian Army maintains its pledge not to use force on the demonstrators. That’s good news, but at this stage of the game the possibilities are still numerous and diverse, and I imagine that eventually a power struggle can be expected. My Mom says hi.

  6. Chris, A couple of questions for you:
    #1 What are your views on the student protests in London recently?
    #2 You know more about Thomas Paine than I do. Is it possible that History has embellished Tom’s story and in truth he and all of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were just rich profiteers who didn’t want to share with the King and who were willing to let a bunch of beguiled farmers and common citizens face the Redcoats on their behalf?

    • I’m all for a bit of protesting! University fees in the UK are being tripled by a government that did not win an election and is only kept in power by a coalition partner party who specifically promised to do away with university fees if in power! If it’s not legitimate to protest at that then democracy really is dead & buried.

      As to Tom Paine being a profiteer, as I understand it Paine was a relatively poor man who was so destitute after he returned to Philadelphia after the French Revolution that he was given a modest house and small-holding by the fledgling US government. He died there in obscurity and poverty some years later. If he was a profiteer he failed dismally.

  7. Standing by.

  8. We await you Yoda.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s