NorthernGent
Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sleazy
A little late to the thread, so lets try drag it back on topic :)
quote:
ORIGINAL: NorthernGent
quote:
ORIGINAL: sleazy
I would not think that the UK emphasizes individuality, if anythting the exact opposite.
From an economic regulation perspective, Britain certainly encourages individuality. Over the last 30 years, the government has stepped back into the shadows and has increasingly shelved its wealth distribution responsibilities. This neo-liberal style of economics (which is essentially a free-for-all), has simultaneously had the intended, social effect of smashing working class institiutions and community.
The intention behind Thatcher's neo-liberal policies was to create a mobile workforce where workers could easily be laid off and redirected to other industries or laid off and cut off from society (in areas where there was no alternative industry). The intention being to increase British business competitiveness. This could only be done by breaking the collective spirit of the working class and their institutions e.g. Trade Unions, working class industries such as mining etc. Consequently, there is a sense of a lack of community running right through British working class society and where there is a lack of community there is a lack of respect for the community. Hence, anti-social behaviour and crime escalating.
The following are facts:
Britain has the highest rate of anti-social behaviour and serious crime in Western Europe (if not the developed world).
Britain has the largest wealth gap in Western Europe (and probably only second to the US in the developed world).
The Scandanavian countries have relatively low levels of crime and also have a relatively small wealth gap.
It doesn't take a genius to work out that neo-liberal economics is creating a significant part of British society that has no respect for their community. Where there's no respect you have theft, casual violence, alcoholism, drug abuse etc. It's little wonder that children growing up in such a community are plagued by the same anti-social behaviour (whether perpetrators or victims).
I would argue it has little to do with finance or economics, but is more about society and education. Education policy creating a surplus of un-educated dolts? Well lower the standards as to what is a suitable/normal/average education. The wealth gap has nothing to do with it, how bad was anti-social behaviour 50 or 100 years ago before not having a TV in every room was enough to put a family below the poverty line. I agree with you that the reasons behind the anti-social behaviour boild down simply to respect for self and others, however equating respect with wealth is a non-starter. My grandfather never had an indoor toilet at home, never earnt more than enough to just about feed the family and put a roof over their heads, but one thing he had in spades was respect for both himself and others.
1) Economic policy has a huge impact on the well-being of society. You can't disassociate the two as if they're not connected.
2) The wealth-gap point relates to this: 100 years ago, the people within a community earned a similar wage (e.g. your grandad). Thus, there was no sense of grievance and no sense of being deprived of a standard of living that others had (because the much higher standard of living was out of sight). In the modern day, there are obvious huge wealth differences. People can see others living a very comfortable lifestyle (e.g. middle class surburbia and television advertising on a daily basis) but they can't achieve it themselves. This fosters huge resentment and is not healthy for society.
3) You must have missed my comment around the wealth gap in Britain and the link to high crime and anti-social behaviour (when compared with other nations) because you failed to address it. Your explanation will be useful if you don't want to appear to be someone who answers modern day statistical links with anecdotes from 50 to 100 years ago.
_____________________________
I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.
Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.
|
RE: Britain and USA bad for children. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread