Why don't we riot like mad ejits

SpaceTime wrote: »

Having spoken to a lot of German academics over the years, I think they've actually got a rather high-handed and somewhat patronising notion that they can spread the German economic model to the less stable countries of Europe.

They see their model as having been a roaring success and can't see why everyone else doesn't just do exactly the same. Then ignore the fact that the rest of Europe doesn't have the same level of dependence on industrial exports and high-tech exports and could be depending on totally different economic areas - financial services & attracting FDI : (UK, Benelux and Ireland), tourism (many Med countries), agribusiness (France in a big way) etc.

I'm not so sure that it's all that macabre, they just think they're right and that everyone else is doing it wrong!

I honestly don't think it's all that much about self-serving self-interest and more about just oversimplification and not understanding how European economies actually work.

Yes, I'd actually agree with you 100% here, but what this misguidedness says is: Germany (and all the countries with similarly misguided economists, i.e. pretty much all countries) share the burden of blame for this entire crisis, regardless of whether or not some countries financial sectors, were more profligate than others (and they were all profligate, in every country), because they let terrible economists run the show.


I agree that most (nearly all) economists (in Germany or otherwise) really do believe they are doing the right thing and taking the optimal path.
I don't believe this is down to Germany though, it has actually occurred throughout nearly all economic thought in academia, going back to the last Great Depression (and significantly worsening since the late-70's/early-80's) - economic academia is pretty much intellectually 'captured', by neoliberal/neoclassical economics, and other economists which don't fit within that mainstream, are marginalized.

So I agree, most of the economists/politicans believe what they are doing is right, because they base their knowledge on 'the only game in town' (or well, by far the most dominant one anyway), i.e. neoclassical economics - however:
Look at past historical precedent, and what the US used neoliberalism to do to South-East Asia, and South America (particularly Chile) - this is not well-intentioned economic policy, miscalculatingly causing harm, it's the effect of ideological capture (with neoclassical/neoliberal economics) of economic academia, and how that has corrupted world politics - and the US have used that to gain significant political control over countries, through their economics.

What does that say about now, that precisely the same policies used to cripple the countries affected by the above, are being used on us now?

A lot of economists/politicians/people have taken this economic ideology at face value, but what does it say about just how innocent it is, when it has been used to destroy countries economies, gain political control over them, strip their assets, and disempower their citizens (eroding/removing democracy essentially).

languagenerd wrote: »

This thread has gone rather off topic now. Do I want to see Ireland's economy back on track? Yes, of course. Do I want to see those corrupt bankers and politicians who helped bring the country to its knees held to account? Yes. Do I want Germany to run Europe? Of course not. But do I think riots will achieve anything to help the previous three situations? No, I don't.

Imagine there were riots in our city centres. Imagine buildings were burnt and smashed and whatever else you think riots should entail. The consequences of that are:
(1) Some people injured or even killed. Lives torn apart. Pressure on the already under-funded emergency services.
(2) The government, already looking at a huge bill for the floods this year, have to figure out how to fund all the repairs. Taxes may increase.
(3) Businesses see their premises and stock destroyed. Some of these are already pushed to the edge by recession: they can't afford to rebuild. Their workforce must go on the dole, costing the government a lot of money, plus lost income tax.
(4) Anyone who's lost their job now doesn't buy lunches in town, or use public transport as often, or go to the shops near their jobs after work. Other local businesses lose out. Further potential job losses and increased social welfare bills. People can't afford any non-essential items, so businesses all over the country lose out.
(5) People lose confidence in the city centre - what if another riot breaks out? They go to shopping centres or travel to another town instead. More shops lose business, further job losses. (This happened to a certain degree in Belfast last Christmas with all the flag trouble)
(6) Tourists see images of Irish riots on the news. They decide it's not safe to come here and choose a different destination. More lost business, more job losses, less money to the exchequer.

And all to achieve... what? To let the government know we're unhappy? There are other ways of doing this, ways that don't involve shooting ourselves in the foot and destroying our own cities.

See the problem with this thread, is that it's almost as if its express purpose has been to get people to talk about rioting, as a means of disparaging protesting and political action with that as a straw-man; a discussion of actual protesting is worth having, but one which focuses on rioting is only ever going to be a complete waste of time.

The people who don't protest are cowards and have zero right to complain about "bankers and dodgy politicians" etc... You get the government you deserve.