So,
Ken Livingstone, the homophobic tart and London mayoral candidate, made the news today by announcing a new plan to fix the economic problems of the world. That plan is to hang a banker each week until the remaining bankers figure it out and bring themselves into line. This plan is likely to have some appeal (hopefully not enough to get him the job) but it fails on so many levels that I'm having a hard time deciding where to start.
First, the fact that Livingstone, the closet fag, is so openly anti-gay means that he should not be allowed to be in charge of a city, or a church choir, or a family, or even be allowed out in the public without a shock collar. Worse yet is the fact that he gets press coverage for this shit (gay bashing not hanging bankers). It's unfortunate that the press-titutes publish this stuff. They are so hard up for ratings or in favor of gay bashing that they actually give this shitbag press time. People like this should get a media blackout that would make Ron Paul look like a rockstar.
Okay, all of that had nothing to do with the problem with Livingstone's comments but I am sick unto death of people, especially power hungry bitches, attacking gay people. It makes me understand why people might nod their heads at his hanging bankers comment because quite frankly, wrong as it might be, it would be quite enjoyable to kick Livingstone as hard as I can in the balls. He'd need a tonsillectomy to get them removed.
However <deep breath>,
That's not the solution and neither is hanging bankers. Like Livingstone, bankers may be maggots but what makes them dangerous is the ability to wield the violence of the government. Without the government, the "too big to fail" would have failed long ago, oil companies would be dinosaurs, Livingstone would never have a single comment repeated by the media, and gay people could marry anyone that they wanted to.
When you give one group of people the power to wield an ungawdly amount of violence and another group of people more money than gawd, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what kind of barter system is going to to be set up. It's something that hanging bankers is not going to fix. Next you'd have to hang owners of big oil, big pharma, big agriculture, and big whatever comes next.
I don't think that Livingstone is smart enough to know what he's doing so it's probably completely accidental that he's throwing the red herring. He's just trying to use a ploy to get himself into office where he can lord over young male interns under his desk.
Occupy Wall Street is making the same mistake. They are mad because the rich can use money to buy politicians completely undermining any idea of a representative republic for the people by the people. Money is the vote. Lobbyists write the laws and law makers don't actually read the laws. They just vote what it says on the memo line on the bribery check. OWS wants, like so many people, to get the money out of politics. First, that's the wrong part of the equation to be looking at and second, it's just plain impossible.
Who is going to pass a law saying that politicians can't accept money? The law makers? Shah, as if. If the law was passed, who would enforce it? People appointed by the law makers? That would be effective.
I stand with OWS against people being able to purchase the capacity for violence from the government but the key isn't in hanging bankers. It's in teaching people that the government does not have the legitimate right to initiate the use of force against people. It's in showing that the immorality in the situation isn't in renting the initiation of force, it is the initiation of force. It's the people who rob, steal, taze, pepperspray, kettle, kill, kidnap, rape, and do it all under "the color of law". All of the "legal" immoral actions taken against the people, that's the real problem.
Education is key also because education isn't violence. Violence is not the solution. Hanging bankers or burning down buildings is not going to solve the problem. Best case scenario for those people thinking that a violent revolution is the answer is that this batch of immoral thugs will be replaced with another set of immoral thugs. Things might be better for a while but in today's fast-paced world, the money would find it's way back into the system within a couple of election cycles. That's how the game works. Unlimited power + unlimited money = unlimited corruption.
The true problem is the belief system and when that changes, everything else will change with it. When the belief system changes, the government will not have enough violence to stop the change. Respect for the government is already a thing of the past. In its place is fear. When fear passes, we will enter the next step for the human race.
. . . to be continued.
