To wonder why there has been no revolution?

[DoctorTwo]

Even the Torygraph is mystified. Why are we not kicking the shit out of the thieving wankers that make up our parliament? Or burning down corporate headquarters and lynching the bosses? These bastards are making us poorer and blaming us for it.

I would say that the world is in such a state of flux at the moment, that the last thing we need is a revolution. We might accidentally destroy ourselves and let in much much worse!

That said, what worries me at the moment is the erosion of our rights, freedom and privacy. Apps now read our phone calls, want full access to our internet, our emails are spied on in fact we have no privacy. I have a strong suspicion that the facebook real name campaign is an effort to enforce more social control, as the riots were spread by social networking and the police realised that they have very little control over them! I could of course be wrong. The government has passed alot of laws that have eroded our rights to privacy and we have seemingly accepted this without any dissent at all!

What amazes me is that 50% of the population is female, and yet despite numerous scandals and the shockingly low conviction rate for sexual violence against women, no MPs are standing up demanding new laws to protect women. Instead of focusing on why did the offender offend, women's behaviour and attire are criticised.

Of course most people don't want to be sacked, an that would contribute to not complaining as well....

There is less violence on the planet than ever in its history at the moment and people in the Uk are much better off than say 30 years ago. I didn't have central heating etc and all the stuff we now take for granted hen i was little.People see the long game and that things are much better than they might be. 60% of women in the Uk are graduates and more and more of us out earn men and are seizing power so it's a good time to be a woman I would say, although perhaps women at home do not feel it in the same way if they aren't earning and making progress in that way.

Also the revolution 1914 etc all failed - we now know communism is a dead duck and we are lucky enough to have capitalism. Even China has a form of it now - we have been vindicated in the West.

The thing about revolution in the sense of violently taking control is that it is the hardest and toughest that win - not the ideals - I don't want that - women don't do well in chaos and violent civil wars and not everyone holds the same ideals - what if the toughest and strongest who take power do not hold the ideals I do? I want a peaceful place for my dc to grow up not a civil war.

And isn't the current economic situation part of globalisation - it isn't just happening here you know - IMO you can't have GDP rising forever at the same rate - contraction and expansion are normal - globally emerging economies are growing - the global economy can only grow at a maximum rate - so if china and parts of Africa are growing at 8-10% then others will contract - we have had a contraction - there is less for everybody - it does bring into sharp contrast the gaps between those with money and those with not and it is gutting when people in power use that power to cushion themselves and yes we should question that and lobby to bring it on to the political agenda and let our voices be heard - and sometime it is like banging your head on a brick wall - but I still prefer that to civil war - at least we still have democracy.

There are so many factors involved globally - resources, energy, skills, civil unrest, social cohesion, power, military and terrorist activity - global survival calls for working together not tearing the place up - why waste resources?

maddening There is no global maximum to GDP growth, although you are correct that contraction and expansion are normal. We are also much better off than at any point in the past, not only richer but with more stuff being attainable

Carol, when you say "we" who do you mean?

Have a look at How the Super-Rich got Richer (Guardian), which points out that economic inequality is worse in Britain than anywhere else in Europe.

If you automatically sneer at the Guardian, try Credit Suisse (PDF), showing that the the richest 85 people in the world are worth more than half the world's population put together. And the Institute For Fiscal Studies (PDF) contains a mass of information about UK wealth & poverty, including that our 2014 Gini coefficient is .34 compared to .26 in 1979.

Measured after housing costs (AHC), 14.6 million (23.2%) were in absolute poverty, an increase of 600,000 individuals [in 2 years] - IFS, UK.

We had a system based on assets. It was called feudalism and it wasn't very egalitarian.

Erm, no. It was called the Gold Standard, and it existed as late as 1971 when it was abolished to make way for what we have now. The only time in history we've had social mobility was between 1945 and 1980ish. You know, back when we hadn't exported our highly skilled well paid jobs to the Far East. And now even China is fucked. Have you heard about Occupy Central?

I understand Switzerland are to have a referendum next month to return their currency to the gold standard. It might be worth buying a few worthless pounds worth of Swiss Marks just in case, 'cos when the FIAT currencies go it'll be those asset backed currencies that will be dominant.

The Death Of Money is a good read but its author is ex CIA so I'm not sure about him.

Planet Ponzi by Mitch Feierstein is worth a look too.

What we're seeing is a massive transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top, and that is unsustainable. We're seeing privatisation of everything, and privatisation always costs more. East Coast Rail proves it. If you want to reduce costs then nationalise the utilities, you know, stuff that was stolen from us to give to foreign governments to pay their pensions.

Because not enough people are uncomfortable enough yet. We are watching revolution unfolding in other countries and we have a long way to go before that is preferable to what we have now. The rich and powerful do what they always do - let go of just enough to keep everyone compliant.

We haven't had a revolution yet because no-one knows what to do about predatory asset-stripping firms or the hollowing out of the middle classes through technological progress.

Communism has been pretty thoroughly discredited as a viable alternative to free market capitalism when it comes to meeting the wants of the mass of humanity. And no-one can agree on the best method or how far to go in terms of controlling its more destructive excesses.

The British state system has always been very "adaptable" is one reason. Look at the success of the Tory party for over 100 years.

However, things can change suddenly. UKIP came out of nowhere (I am a supporter). There were those riots a couple of years ago - I felt I understood the disaffection there too. The Scottish independence referendum.

So things can change very suddenly.

As someone said, revolutions are bloody and unpleasant, so I wouldn't like that. But I do feel the need for social change.

Sorry Mannatee, what do you mean by hollowing out of the middle classes? Genuinely interested.

Agree with Manatee very much too.

I think what Manatee refers to are the consequences of changes in the workplace: for example, a lot of bookkeeping/accountancy is becoming increasingly automated with computer packages that do half the work for you, so fewer actual people are required. It's harder than it was to become a solicitor, as the big firms get people on lower pay to do a lot of the legwork because you can now search a database rather than having to know by heart the legal cases you need to refer to. All this makes me worry for my DCs' futures (and everyone else's DCs, come to that).

Communism is a failure. Unfettered capitalism is leading to horrible inequality. We need something better. What we don't need is riots leading to armed revolution, or extreme political parties promising to a bright new dawn (I was watching the first episode of The World at War last night, Hitler's rise to power: makes the blood run cold).

Computers mean that there are fewer jobs, fewer skilled jobs especially, this trend will probably continue, 3d printing will revolutionize manufacturing.
There is enough to go round, and less and less work is needed to keep things running, yet we still believe that everyone should work 40 hours a week.
The problem is that those at the top are hoarding everything so that the rest of us don't have enough

Technology creates different (skilled) jobs. People start turning towards the service industry as well.
It may take a while to adjust, but it doesn't necessarily mean unemployment.

yes,it does, but overall the amount of work required to keep things running is reduced as we become technologically more sophisticated, we can theorise a point in the future where machines and computers will be able to do almost everything for us

I think people feel completely disposable now. If we cause a fuss at work we can be so easily replaced by the queue of millions waiting behind us.
Divide and conquer is working to perfection, we're so busy squabbling amongst ourselveses that we don't band together in a common interest any more.

If we cause a fuss at work we can be so easily replaced by the queue of millions waiting behind us

thats why no govt really wants full employment, the unemployed are demonised and denigrated, urged to find work but really a large reserve of unemployed people is desirable and necessary, it keep wages down and gives more power to large corporations

Yep Suzanne couldn't agree more. The pittance that they pay in dole is positively a bargain for that trade off.

large reserve of unemployed people is desirable and necessary, it keep wages down and gives more power to large corporations

complete bollocks - it is only the left and unions who see workers as an unsubstantiated mass, firms know that people vary significantly in thier suitability to roles and successful companies work hard to retain good employees

Income equality is not necessarily a good thing, it is the basic standards that are important and 99% of this country are in a better position than they were 10 years ago.

If you really want to see how well off we are, then consider the poorest 10 % of the UK compared to the rest of the world. this shows the UK poorest 10% have a better life than Portugal's richest 10%. and the best lace to be poor, US and Canada.

99% of this country are in a better position than they were 10 years ago
absolute bollocks Carol, the richest 1% has gotten richer not poorer in the last 10 years

Come over here

Income equality is not necessarily a good thing, it is the basic standards that are important and 99% of this country are in a better position than they were 10 years ago

What utter horseshit. My current pay is about 25% of what it was 10 years ago due to the industry I was in then more or less disappearing. The same is true of most people I know. Their income has plummeted whilst their bosses' has risen.

Brava aermingers, nice post.