Skip to main content

The Occupy London Movement

The reason that you feel disenfranchised is that all 3 political parties in the UK are the same....

What is the "Occupy London" movement about? It is about obscene wages, lack
of jobs, lack of society, no vision of the future, money above love.  It is about the pain caused because society is being run for something other than localities and people.  It is about society being used to service global capitalism rather than capitalism being used for the service of society.

Global capitalism is another name for globalisation.  Globalisation IS the overpaid bankers and directors floating to the top of international society, the replacement of local cultures with the plastic sights and sounds of world commerce, the massive exploitation of resources, low wages for the many and huge payouts for the few.  Globalisation is what we are against. Corporatism is the source of the impulse towards globalisation.

Why doesn't the Occupy Movement have any policies? It is because we have been told that ideas such as Globalization and the consequent free movement of capital and labour are inevitable, good ideas. This conflict between what we have been told to believe and what is truly happening has made us paralysed.

We are paralysed because if you believe in Globalization you cannot fully regulate the banks or limit top salaries. you cannot have a vibrant national culture and you cannot truly be Green.  The current economic slump is due to globalisation but no one bothers to look at the data because they are believers.  Our paralysis is due to our beliefs being out of step with our own reality.  We have second hand beliefs fed to us by the governing classes. We have been convinced by the media that Globalisation is almost "holy" when it is itself the problems we are confronting.


Globalisation is not inevitable. It was tried in the 1920s and abandoned because it caused the 1930s Depression/Great Depression. (See Globalisation and Great Depressions). Globalisation is where rich corporations and on-the-make apparatchiks get together to carve up the world between themselves. Globalisation does not just destroy society, it destroys the world itself.(See Globalisation and global warming).

The only way to construct a secure and Green World is for each nation to be charged with taking care of its own economy, environment and people. If a nation is short on resources it should strive to substitute local renewables, if it is short of labour it should automate and organise, if it has social unrest it should struggle for a united society.  There should be international law to regulate the relations between states and this is the role of the UN.  Nations are the unit of diversity and this must be respected. (See International Law versus Globalisation).

The mantra that our problems can only be solved at an international level is an outright lie spread by the Globalising Tendency in the media. The truth is that with the present global regulation of trade and investment our problems cannot be solved.  The solutions lie at the national level with each state tackling its own problems in its own way.

You will find that the paralysis amongst those in the Occupy Movement occurs because people who believe in globalisation, free labour movement and multiculturalism cannot accept that these ideas create greed and social conflict.  The corporates and media have brainwashed us so well that there is a widespread belief that evil is good.  You cannot stop greed unless you confine the greedy to your nation's economic system, you cannot stop social conflict if you nurture widely opposing ideas of how life should be lived in a single nation, nations are the Western unit of diversity, not tribes.

It was the fear of further war that led to the current round of Globalisation.  In their fear the people let this monster roam free again.  Wars can be stopped by nations agreeing to international laws that govern their relations, we must not create a world of tribes within mega states because this is the real cause of wars.

If you want change, get rid of your support for Globalization, take action to create a world of nations, each with their respected, diverse cultures living in peace under International Law.  International trade is OK but globalisation is a dystopian catastrophe.

The reason that you feel disenfranchised is that all 3 political parties in the UK are the same, they are all part of the Globalising Tendency. Worse still, you are probably a supporter yourself even though it is obvious that a world run from New York or Brussels cannot possibly take into account the democratic desires of people living in such disparate places as Greece, India and England, cannot possibly look after nature in you back yard and will create a single world economy that will collapse all too easily.

See:


Could the credit crunch have been foreseen?

The London Riots and the Mediocracy

Nations are the unit of diversity




Comments

Anonymous said…
interesting and useful reading.

Popular posts from this blog

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H

The Falklands have always been Argentine - Las Malvinas son Argentinas

"The Falklands have always been Argentine" is taught to every Argentine child as a matter of faith.  What was Argentina during the time when it "always" possessed Las Malvinas?  In this article I will trace the history of Argentina in the context of its physical and political relationship with "Las Malvinas", the Falkland Islands.  The Argentine claim to the Falkland Islands dates from a brief episode in 1831-32 so it is like Canada claiming the USA despite two centuries of separate development. This might sound like ancient history but Argentina has gone to war for this ancient claim so the following article is well worth reading. For a summary of the legal case see: Las Malvinas: The Legal Case Argentina traces its origins to Spanish South America when it was part of the Viceroyalty of the Rio del Plata.  The Falklands lay off the Viceroyalty of Peru, controlled by the Captain General of Chile.  In 1810 the Falklands were far from the geographical b

The Report on Racism

The " Report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities " has just been published.  The Commissioners were nearly all from BAME backgrounds and have produced a robust and fair Report. The Report identified a class divide in which the cycle of advantage maintains a section of the population in wealth and leaves the large bulk of the population in relative poverty.   The wealthy class is largely white British but the poorer class consists of large numbers of white British and other ethnic groups.  This class divide causes a bias in the crude statistics on disadvantage so that majority, poor white British are labelled as "white supremacists" etc. when it is the small wealthy class that actually creates the disparity that causes this analysis. The most striking finding is that different ethnic groups had very different experiences and outcomes.  Educational outcomes demonstrate this at a glance: Red text added for this article Most ethnic groups had better outcome