CCTV Cameras will shout you out (now with added kids voices)

[repiV]

To all those that claim CCTV has a positive effect on our security, riddle me this:

The UK has the highest crime rate of any developed nation (yes, including the USA) yet has 20% of the world's total CCTV cameras.
Hong Kong is one of the safest cities in the world, yet CCTV is not really used there at all in public. It also happens to have the most capitalist economy on the planet, which negates the notion that capitalism causes crime.
Why? Respect and attitude. The best method of preventing crime is instilling proper values, not cracking the whip.

 

[StardogChampion]

To all those that claim CCTV has a positive effect on our security, riddle me this:

The UK has the highest crime rate of any developed nation (yes, including the USA) yet has 20% of the world's total CCTV cameras.
Hong Kong is one of the safest cities in the world, yet CCTV is not really used there at all in public. It also happens to have the most capitalist economy on the planet, which negates the notion that capitalism causes crime.
Why? Respect and attitude. The best method of preventing crime is instilling proper values, not cracking the whip.

Our society is filled with chavs though.

 

[repiV]

Our society is filled with chavs though.

Why do you think that is?

 

[Gorgon]

lol they are copying the same way V-Vendetta movie did.

 

[Mr Scott]

Private property isn't a right, it's a plague on society.

how is it a plague on society? without private property everyone would be forced to live in the same conditions in council estates even when they have the money for better housing and living conditions. I dont think anyone here would want to have their decent, law-abiding family live next to a bunch of loud, foul mouthed family of gorrilas who dont care about what their kids get up to and happily let them vandalise and terrorise the neighbourhood

 

[Pulse]

Why do you think that is?

Because its easy as pie to abuse the benefits system in this country and spend your dole money on white lightning and argos bling.

 

[repiV]

Because its easy as pie to abuse the benefits system in this country and spend your dole money on white lightning and argos bling.

That's the symptom, not the cause.
People with the right attitude wouldn't abuse the benefits system in the first place. At the risk of sounding trite, I blame it on the kooky far-left attitudes responsible for such concepts as "deferred success", outlawing discipline and rights without responsibilities.
This country is mentally ill - people have no respect, no sense of responsibility and don't give a shit about anyone else.

Just look what happens when you combine the British framework for society with a population who actually have decent values left - you get a prosperous, respectful, very hard-working and almost crime-free society like Hong Kong. They also enjoy far more freedom than we do.

 

[Shippi]

.

 

[repiV]

We already have cctv in public places. PUBLIC places. I have no problem with that. If they want to make them talk then fine, give it a shot. We're getting the talking cctv in my town soon. It'll be interesting to see it in action

People generally don't appreciate being treated like kids.
The overriding factor here is that this government doesn't trust grown adults to run their own lives.

 

[15357]

people have no respect, no sense of responsibility and don't give a shit about anyone else.

What, did you just copy our ethics textbook on western VS traditional values?

 

[repiV]

What, did you just copy our ethics textbook on western VS traditional values?

Umm...
These aren't specifically Western values, although they are far more prevalent in the West. They are values that accompany the culture of entitlement created by socialist whackjobs - love of "I deserve", "I demand" and "I want"...without any concern for "I must", "I should" or "I am obligated to".

 

[Pulse]

Umm...
These aren't specifically Western values, although they are far more prevalent in the West. They are values that accompany the culture of entitlement created by socialist whackjobs - love of "I deserve", "I demand" and "I want"...without any concern for "I must", "I should" or "I am obligated to".

All symptoms of the capitalist societies we hold dear.

 

[repiV]

All symptoms of the capitalist societies we hold dear.

You mean except the capitalist societies like Hong Kong, China, South Korea, Japan and Singapore which haven't yet been overrun by pansy liberals who bring their kids up to believe that life owes them something?
It's got jack shit to do with capitalism, and everything to do with workshy youth who think they deserve life handed to them on a plate and the leftist loons who empower them.

 

[15357]

We're getting liberals here, but we're resisting. We shalt never be overrun! Those pesky hippies and students with molotovs will never have their way!


WE/THE POLICE SHALL SMITE THEM! SHUT UP AND WORK, COMMIE SCUM! MWHAHA!

 

[Sulkdodds]

You mean except the capitalist societies like Hong Kong, China, South Korea, Japan and Singapore which haven't yet been overrun by pansy liberals who bring their kids up to believe that life owes them something?
It's got jack shit to do with capitalism, and everything to do with workshy youth who think they deserve life handed to them on a plate and the leftist loons who empower them.

Liberals like capitalism.

Leftist /= liberal.

The former focuses on equality while the latter focuses on freedom (with authoritarianism making a third side: order). Liberalism has traditionally been about economic freedom as well as social freedom - more than social freedom in many cases. It was only at the turn of the last century that the idea of 'positive freedom' - that government intervention might actually be necessary to increase liberty - came about.

Pardon my pedantry regarding political definitions, but your rant against 'liberals' is misplaced and seems symptomatic of the American polarisation between 'right' and 'left'.

People with the right attitude wouldn't abuse the benefits system in the first place. At the risk of sounding trite, I blame it on the kooky far-left attitudes responsible for such concepts as "deferred success", outlawing discipline and rights without responsibilities.
This country is mentally ill - people have no respect, no sense of responsibility and don't give a shit about anyone else.

...They are values that accompany the culture of entitlement created by socialist whackjobs - love of "I deserve", "I demand" and "I want"...without any concern for "I must", "I should" or "I am obligated to".

One could equally argue that "I deserve" and "I want" are far more applicable to a capitalist system, where, in theory, all will be well and balanced if everybody acts in their own self-interest. Hell, the idea is that everybody will get what they deserve (though I'd say only those who can achieve the kind of success required by full-on Thatcherism will be judged as 'successful' - and that their are other ways in which they might be deserving). Those tending more toward the socialist or the egalitarian would say that their systems place far more value on social obligations - socialism is, after all, fundamentally based on the assumption that a society is more than the sum of its parts, that we are collectively responsible for the world we live in and 'we are all in this together'.

Opposite this, we have Margaret Thatcher and "there is no such thing as society."

A lot of people, political scientists and otherwise, largely of a leftist pursuasion, granted, would associate the weakening of UK 'civil culture' with the advancement of individualism in modern politics. But being 'leftist' doesn't mean support of socialism and certainly doesn't mean disregard of responsibilities.

This is where I, not just 'certain people', disagree with you. You'll notice a distinction above between 'one might argue' and 'I'd say' - because except for those bits where I go out of my way to identify something as my own opinion, this is an issue I haven't really made my own mind up on yet - and though I tend undeniably towards the economic left wing on many issues, I also value capitalism as a system. But your characterisation of leftism as 'outlawing discipline' and actively encouraging laziness and complacency seems mildly bullshit - as much as it might be for me to characterise capitalism, or liberalism, in a similar way: capitalists don't care about anything except themselves! The selfish and greedy pursuit of money and self-advancement erodes responsibilities and social cohesion!

I have to admit that's a lot closer to what I myself believe.

A SOCIALIST or LEFTIST would say that the kind of youthful dead-endedness you describe is more due to the destruction of any feeling that there might be a chance of advancement - due to the pulling away of those individuals possessing the qualities required for self-advancement in a post-Thatcherite society from their fellows - social mobility has gone down an incredible amount since the seventies.

Of course, I'm damn sure many individuals are themselves at fault for their thuggish lazyness - but if there is a socio-political dimension I'd argue that it owes more to feelings of futility rather than of entitlement.

Certainly I've rarely met anybody from disadvantaged backgrounds who particularly believes passionately that they are entitled to a helping hand in everything - rather, the two sentiments most prevalent are "who cares? nothing changes anyway" and, alternatively, hard-nosed capitalism. In fact, a friend of mine - very smart guy, very sharp, great to talk to - grew up in a shithole area of inner-city london where kids at his school cheered 9/11 and 11-year olds walked around with guns stuffed down their trousers. But his political beliefs are far closer to yours than to mine, or to any more committed 'leftist's.

THE ABOVE: SLIGHTLY CONFUSED, NON-COMMITTAL AND MAYBE INCOHERENT?
WOOP WOOP WOOP
Yeah, that'd be because the issues here are so big that hundreds of books have been written on them and they're still not resolved.

 

[repiV]

Liberals like capitalism.

Leftist /= liberal.

The former focuses on equality while the latter focuses on freedom (with authoritarianism making a third side: order). Liberalism has traditionally been about economic freedom as well as social freedom - more than social freedom in many cases. It was only at the turn of the last century that the idea of 'positive freedom' - that government intervention might actually be necessary to increase liberty - came about.

Pardon my pedantry regarding political definitions, but your rant against 'liberals' is misplaced and seems symptomatic of the American polarisation between 'right' and 'left'.

I am aware of this. However, classical liberalism is now known as "libertarianism", due to the hijacking of the former term. I am very much a libertarian.

One could equally argue that "I deserve" and "I want" are far more applicable to a capitalist system, where, in theory, all will be well and balanced if everybody acts in their own self-interest. Hell, the idea is that everybody will get what they deserve (though I'd say only those who can achieve the kind of success required by full-on Thatcherism will be judged as 'successful' - and that their are other ways in which they might be deserving). Those tending more toward the socialist or the egalitarian would say that their systems place far more value on social obligations - socialism is, after all, fundamentally based on the assumption that a society is more than the sum of its parts, that we are collectively responsible for the world we live in and 'we are all in this together'.

I act in my own self interest, but I don't infringe on others' ability to do the same. There is a big difference between being self-centered and being inconsiderate and irresponsible - the former makes society function, the latter stops it functioning properly.

Opposite this, we have Margaret Thatcher and "there is no such thing as society."

A lot of people, political scientists and otherwise, largely of a leftist pursuasion, granted, would associate the weakening of UK 'civil culture' with the advancement of individualism in modern politics. But being 'leftist' doesn't mean support of socialism and certainly doesn't mean disregard of responsibilities.

This is where I, not just 'certain people', disagree with you. You'll notice a distinction above between 'one might argue' and 'I'd say' - because except for those bits where I go out of my way to identify something as my own opinion, this is an issue I haven't really made my own mind up on yet - and though I tend undeniably towards the economic left wing on many issues, I also value capitalism as a system. But your characterisation of leftism as 'outlawing discipline' and actively encouraging laziness and complacency seems mildly bullshit - as much as it might be for me to characterise capitalism, or liberalism, in a similar way: capitalists don't care about anything except themselves! The selfish and greedy pursuit of money and self-advancement erodes responsibilities and social cohesion!

I have to admit that's a lot closer to what I myself believe.

A SOCIALIST or LEFTIST would say that the kind of youthful dead-endedness you describe is more due to the destruction of any feeling that there might be a chance of advancement - due to the pulling away of those individuals possessing the qualities required for self-advancement in a post-Thatcherite society from their fellows - social mobility has gone down an incredible amount since the seventies.

Of course, I'm damn sure many individuals are themselves at fault for their thuggish lazyness - but if there is a socio-political dimension I'd argue that it owes more to feelings of futility rather than of entitlement.

I'm finding it hard to digest everything that you're saying because it's a bit all over the place, but one of the key points here certainly is that in our current society, people are entitled by the system, or can get away with leeching off others.
If we had a more hard-nosed capitalist system, people would have to get off their arse and better themselves, because they have no other options.
The welfare state allows the cycle of poverty to continue.

Certainly I've rarely met anybody from disadvantaged backgrounds who particularly believes passionately that they are entitled to a helping hand in everything - rather, the two sentiments most prevalent are "who cares? nothing changes anyway" and, alternatively, hard-nosed capitalism. In fact, a friend of mine - very smart guy, very sharp, great to talk to - grew up in a shithole area of inner-city london where kids at his school cheered 9/11 and 11-year olds walked around with guns stuffed down their trousers. But his political beliefs are far closer to yours than to mine, or to any more committed 'leftist's.

I grew up in a shithole area of outer London, although it wasn't as bad as what you've described. I too had a very disadvantaged upbringing, but if anything that's only made me more determined to achieve what I want to in life.

THE ABOVE: SLIGHTLY CONFUSED, NON-COMMITTAL AND MAYBE INCOHERENT?
WOOP WOOP WOOP
Yeah, that'd be because the issues here are so big that hundreds of books have been written on them and they're still not resolved.

Yeah, it was a bit hard to follow at times.

 

[99.vikram]

Repiv:

There will always be talentless losers in society, but we can't disown them completely - they are from the same species as us, after all.
I feel they should be given the bare minimum to feed and clothe themselves..

 

[repiV]

Repiv:

There will always be talentless losers in society, but we can't disown them completely - they are from the same species as us, after all.
I feel they should be given the bare minimum to feed and clothe themselves..

Even talentless losers can earn enough money to feed and clothe themselves.