They’re Anti-Capitalists. The protestors, I mean… they’re protesting because they’re against Capitalism. They look at the world around them, and they see the G20 doing all they can to put politicians firmly in control of economies around the world, and they think the problem is Capitalism?
Well, of course they do. It’s implicit in the message being sent out by Brown – Capitalism is something that is suffered as a means of raising cash only, end of story. If Capitalism gets out of hand though, the leash is to be tightened.
The protesters cry, Tightened? Why not simply abolish it altogether? Capitalism’s bad, isn’t it? Why suffer it at all? Look at all the poverty and inequality! Look at all the dirty, evil profit people make! Absolish profit, have everyone making just what is absolutely necessary for the common good, and greed, selfishness and all these other things that make human life so miserable will magically disappear and paradise will be achieved. And we’ll all have what we need and it’ll be grand. And there’ll be peace, everyone will be looked after and we’ll have moved to a whole other level of human existence.
So it’s an old dream. A dream that refuses to die, because it’s so simple and easy. Just make people do things ‘morally’. All the Government has to do is say the word, and it’s done.. what’s the problem?
The problem is that their perfect society represents desperate poverty for absolutely everyone, with brutal totalitarian policing tactics required to cope with all the people who’ll try to break the rules or would literally rather die than remain trapped in such a country. For an ideological system that begins by taking everything away from individuals, it leaves a lot of individuals with nothing to lose.
See, as I understand it, the G20 are agreeing to major intervention in economies, new regulations on hedge funds (nothing to do with the crisis), “tax havens” (nothing to do with the crisis and explicitly doing nothing wrong), banker bonuses and so on and so forth.
Anyone who has even the slightest concept of Capitalism and Free Markets understand that the anti-Capitalists are, in fact, getting exactly what they want.
Those of us who believe in economic liberalism as a force for good see that the measures being taken are going to make things a lot worse. Yet people are having massive protests because Brown and other Global leaders aren’t going far enough. How far is far enough?
To make matters worse, listening to coverage today, it seemed clear that most people on the ‘anti-capitalism’ side had very little concept of what it was they were against, if any concept at all. Meaningless verbiage, crass, one dimensional soundbites and drunken, demented slurring summed up my impression of the protestors vox pops.
The idea that there’s groups and organisations out there that believe Brown represents the interests of Capitalism is absurd. People are clearly disgusted at the bags full of cash thrown at the banks with nothing to show for it, but to assume this is Capitalism in action rather demonstrates the disconnect between these anti-capitalist protesters and what I like to call, “reality.”
It seems they don’t have the first clue what it is they’re against – they just want eco-socialism, they want it now – or, failing that, can they at least have a massive increase in spending in the public sector, please? That’s what it always boils down to.
So the hard left flexed their muscles (if not their brains) today and somehow they’ve made Brown look like a moderate centrist rather than the instinctive central planner he’s become. And the ‘debate’ in the media looks like it’s between Anti-Capitalists and hardcore Socialists.
Some choice. April Fool’s day indeed.
Update: Normal people also attended this protest. Even Pro-Capitalists, defending Free Markets.
Martin said...
1 Apr 09 at 8:12 pm
I personally believe that the main delusion such protestors suffer from is that “capitalism” is exclusivly the domain of the corporation; the multinational; the businessman in a head office. They fail to realize that it’s more than that, my ownership of my laptop is capitalism just as much as the businessman’s millions (that said, giant corporations are somewhat anti-capitalist- Stefan Molyneux shall explain).
It’s also, of course, people’s rights to their own lives- how they live, who they associate with, everything. They fail to understand what “capitalism” really entails, instead falling into the “bash the bankers” hype.
Oranjepan said...
1 Apr 09 at 10:00 pm
And their protests ‘against’ this Labour govt just happen to fit perfectly with the agenda Brown pretends he is pushing – the protesters say they are against Brown & Co, but all the public sees is a mass of people agreeing with what he says…
John Dixon said...
2 Apr 09 at 12:42 am
I was at the protests, I’m a capitalist, a liberal and a relatively moderate guy politically. I know it may seem that way from the outside, ‘you’re all a bunch of lefty anarchist nuts’ etc. etc. But in reality there’s quite a diverse range of people protesting, including the occasional banker (they’re getting screwed more than most sectors). we’re protesting about a heck of a lot of things, from climate change to the bailouts to global development etc. we aren’t caricatures of your libertarian viewpoint of lefties, we’re people who care.
Charlotte Gore said...
2 Apr 09 at 12:56 am
Hi John,
Yes I’m aware there were other kinds of people protesting for a multitude of reasons so perhaps was a bit unfair of me not to mention that in the post.
Sadly protests aren’t about opinion of individual participants, they’re about the collective message of the mob, and on this occasion it’s the eco-socialists that claimed ownership of this mob, and counted people like you as their support.
Of course it’s not true – most people will have been there for the sheer fact of something happening – I myself once followed a mob marching through Galway in Ireland only to find myself getting a speech from a Sínn Feín politician. Does that make me a keen committed Republican? Of course not.
My mistake is treating people as a group rather than as individuals. Hmm.. funny how that always ends badly isn’t it?
The Dog said...
2 Apr 09 at 7:37 am
“Meaningless verbiage, crass, one dimensional soundbites and drunken, demented slurring”
Takes one to know one. Look at your own posts.
Charlotte Gore said...
2 Apr 09 at 8:56 am
I slur?
The North Briton said...
2 Apr 09 at 9:03 am
As a wide-eyed seventeen year old I took part, ‘No Logo’ in hand, in a few of the more minor G7 demonstrations all that time ago. And god damn, there wasn’t half the amount digital SLR cameras, video phones and camcorders being waved by protestors back then. Damn capitalism…
(Yours is the first blogroll I’ve been added to I think, thanks! Even if it is under the heading ‘not yet lib dem’. Tssk ; )
The North Briton said...
2 Apr 09 at 9:08 am
Oh, and my Randian Leeds barrister friend text me to say she saw someone with a ‘who is John Galt?’ sign on the BBC.
Stu said...
2 Apr 09 at 9:09 am
I wonder if you’d be interested in my proposed positive solution to replacing capitalism?
It appears that there were peaceful protesters in London yesterday, in a ‘Climate Camp’, but the police didn’t attack them or cordon them off so we didn’t see them on the news. Funny how the police only seem to go for the ones who are smashing up buildings…
Charlotte Gore said...
2 Apr 09 at 9:21 am
NB, I saw the Who Is John Galt sign on the BBC too.
Stu, where do I sign up to become one of the watery bints? What a job!
Charlie said...
2 Apr 09 at 9:51 am
The problem with regulation is that it requires politicians and civil servants to understand what they are regulating and the likely unintended consequences of their actions. I agree with Cherie Blair, Brown is not as nearly intelligent as he thinks he is. There is nothing he has done over the last 12 years where I can think he has produced good quality legislation. Brown can produce quantity, not quality. Compared to many academics, Newton , Einstein and Darwin never wrote that much, but what they did produce demonstrated a profound insight into the universe. Regulations become a job creation scheme for the mediocre unless one is very wise.
Wen the American Constitution was written, America was fortunate to be have some exceptionally able people . There is no evidence that any country since has had such able people to write an constitution.
Regulation is likley to become a massive job creation scheme for the mediocre- where is the modern day Jefferson, Washington, Adams,Lincoln, Churchill, Gladstone, Lloyd George, Atlee, Keynes ?
Tristan said...
2 Apr 09 at 10:19 am
Depends what you mean by capitalism.
The historical use of the term capitalism has nothing to do with free markets. Its the system of ownership of the means of production by an oligarchy who use force (usually through the state) to achieve and maintain that position.
Capitalism meaning free markets is a modern redefinition of the term, and one rejected by most on the anti-capitalist left (although sadly many conflate free markets with currently existing markets – having been encouraged to by the anti-free market right).
Add in that the existing economic system is not a system of free markets, but a system of state/business rule where the two are now so intertwined that they are difficult to separate.
Its the system of regulation to eliminate competition and induce ‘stability’ for elites whilst ensuring the rest of the population is kept at a comfortable minimum standard of living through welfare to prevent redistribution of power along more liberal, egalitarian lines.
For most people, capitalism and free markets are what we have now, which is what is not working.
Charlotte Gore said...
2 Apr 09 at 10:51 am
I couldn’t agree more. Thanks very much for that Tristan. Makes perfect sense.
It’s the old problem of useless labels again. Is this an English Language problem, that words mean whatever people want them to mean?
Charlotte Gore said...
2 Apr 09 at 10:52 am
Charlie, exactly the same question that crosses my mind all the time.
Blackacre said...
2 Apr 09 at 2:04 pm
Damn – North Briton got ahead of me on my observation when looking at the demo in front of the Bank of England yesterday that an awful lot of them have expensive looking Canon and Nikon digital cameras. They would only get those at an affordable price with the benefit of capitalism and free trade. Contradictions abound in the happy world of the anti-caps.
Charlotte Gore said...
2 Apr 09 at 2:09 pm
Yes indeed.
I remember having a chat with a Socialist friend, and gave the example of boats. Boats are labour intensive to make, require a lot of materials and engineering skill, and ultimately a small boat builder might only be able to make a handful a year, if that.
How do you decide who gets a boat? Simple, money decides… you set the price at a level at which the boat sells and there’s exactly one person who wants that particular boat at that particular price.
Capitalism’s great, I said, because it allows us to have boats (if we can afford them).
My Socialist friend replied, Ah, but under socialism, you’d have the time to build your own boat and it would be shared with the community so everyone would have access to sailing.
That really sticks in my head as the day I realised Socialism was mad.