It would be easy to dismiss Charles Moore where, in his latest piece he asks: is the Left right after all? In fact, it is incredibly easy, because the man is actually picking holes in what the Right calls "the free market", which the Left thinks is actually a set-up.

More to the point, despite the startling title, this is an incoherent piece which, as far as I can see, leads you up the garden path but does not really take you anywhere. Is the man saying that capitalism is wrong, or simply does not work? Is he complaining about a failure of democracy, or what?

That apart though, the fact that the question is even asked is intriguing. All is not well in the mind of Moore, and the man is struggling with the idea that some of his long-held beliefs might be flawed – or even wrong.

View full article here

Mr Moore thinks we are on this earth for a purpose, we aren't - get used to it.

This is the fundamental problem with the intellectuals, they think life has an aim and they are the only ones with the knowledge and ability to choose the destination and the path to get there.

The world is chaotic, uncertain, and can't be controlled, the bane of all central planners, and their armies of officials. Their actions lead to wars and bankruptcy.

The NOTW was there to sell newspapers. It wasn't there to educate or lead it's readers. The BBC has that role and we can see it is a tool for propaganda, of the unwanted sort. Not only that but the victims have to pay to watch it. At least with the papers you don't have to buy them, with the BBC, if you want a TV, you have no choice.

The central planners of the European Commission and their lackeys do great harm, we can see it all round us. Lets expose them for all to see, but how do we do that if they can close newspapers they don't approve of?

This is not a failure of 'Capitalism' or the 'Free Markets', since we have neither.
The failure is in the assumption that a Sovereign government is a responsible borrower. Socialist governments have asked to borrow too much and the banks failed to treat them like wayward kids and limit borrowing to 25% GDP, say.
Had the banks tried to clip the wings of a free-spending Socialist government, then there would have been howls of 'political motivation'.
So one can only blame the banks for inappropriate lending if one assumes that governments are known to be incompetent and banks are in charge of the world economy.
So the Socialist logic is: We demanded and spent money like water, and now you capitalist bastards want it back.

The problem with all of it, is that both the Lefties (cultural Marxists) and the Right (Globalists/Corporations) or statism and corporatism as the OP calls them, both are following the long-term UN agenda of wealth transfer from rich nations to poor nations.

Which is why we have mass immigration (causing wage deflation and changing the culture and society), industry (especially manufacturing) being moved to third world countries and foreign aid being increased at a time when we can't even afford to run our armed services.

The world has been turned upside down.

Murdoch should never have been allowed to acquire such a large media empire, it was bound to be corrupt if for no other reason that one man couldn't possibly control it and Politicians of left and right assisted corruption process by sucking up to him.

Our problem is that the majority of our politicians ( I can't dignify them with the term ' leaders') are incompetent, corrupt or both and hence our institutions are the same.

We need real democracy but I have no idea how we set about achieving that or exactly what it is.

Small c, is correct, I hope he doesn't mean Dave's lot - otherwise he's got an eternity to wait.

Born 1954 said:



I know this is off topic, and irrespective as to what Mr Moore may or may not believe, your statement is a dogmatic and massive assumption.
I suggest you should have prefaced your view with the words "In my opinion" & etc.
You are of course free to say and believe that "we" are not on this earth for a purpose, but millions of others in history and today believe the exact opposite.
Those of many religions, but especially and uniquely Christians who believe in the living God, and the record of Jesus Christ's intervention into time, space, and history. To take it no further than this: "In Him we live, and move, and have our being" .

I couldn't quite see what conclusion Moore was coming to.

It's long been realised that there are defects in capitalism which need government intervention and without which it turns into something which is not capitalism. That's why we have regulations concerning cartels and monopolies. Standard Oil was forced to be broken up in 1911. Much of what we see now is the result of inadequate government regulation or governments being sucked into being a part of the thing they are supposed to be regulating.

Very long been realised ...

(Quoted from memory, so apologies if it is not exact.)



Agreed, so long as "inadequate" is not read to mean "too little".
The finanical crisis is not a consequence of too little regulation: it is a consequence of far too much regulation, pointing in the wrong direction.

Left and right are 20th century.

It's now the political class and the wider bubble vs. the plebs. Part of the mix is also corporatism (/coporate statism), where the people the left hate - big bank/big business and the people the right hate - big government - are in bed with each other and screwing the rest of us (erm, if that makes sense?).

So, the more perceptive on the right will start to notice the that left have the odd valid point, and vice versa. But they're still behind the curve if they are talking in these terms.

The great problem withdefending people's rights on principle is that you normally have to defend the rights of unattractive people, because they are the ones picked when the state tries to extend itself.

Liberals always knew this though it is a principle unknownn to the Pseudoliberals now bearing the name.

In the same way freedom of the press means defending the NotW.
-------------------------------

Probably the biggest thing missing in Britain today is some opposition party to put the free market case. In some ways an opposition is more important than a government for promoting ideas because the government is more restrained (& the Tories are run by somebody with no interest in the free market or anything but power)

UKIP do try but with an electoral system that disenfranchises us and broadcast media controlled by the state (the real reason for the attack on News International) it is not easy.

In a real free market (if that is what you want ) it should be easy and cheap to set up your own newspaper , television channel or radio .
If its expensive to set up and/or run the above then its no surprise that the above eventually are run by corporates .

The word which best sums up our current politico-economic system is fascism. I'm surprised more people don't get it, just because our leaders don't strut around in jackboots and invade Ethiopia (though to be fair, they are having a go at Libya).

With respect, ought not you have prefaced your view with the same formula of words as you suggested to ron1954 because belief is not proof?

In addition to the confusion you identify, Dr. N, Charles Moore seems unable to gather that the pendulum has gone full circle and stopped at Noon. Not only have both Left and Right met and matched there (as others suggest above), they are consequently responsible for our neu Dog Days: "an evil time 'when the seas boiled, wine turned sour, Quinto raged in anger, dogs grew mad, and all creatures became languid, causing to man burning fevers, hysterics, and phrensies' according to Brady’s Clavis Calendarium, 1813."**


**"Dog Days"^ Brady, J: "Clavis Calendaria", vol. II, page 89. Nichols, Son, and Bentley, 1815. Qtd. on Wikipedia 22 July 2011. Accessed 23 July 2011.