Another masterpiece from La Coulter, who agrees with me in seeing the UK riots as a product of the Nanny State:
Those of you following the barbaric rioting in Britain will not have failed to notice that a sizable proportion of the thugs are white, something not often seen in this country.
Not only that, but in a triumph of feminism, a lot of them are girls. Even the "disabled" (according to the British benefits system) seem to have miraculously overcome their infirmities to dash out and steal a few TVs.
Congratulations, Britain! You've barbarized your citizenry, without regard to race, gender or physical handicap!
With a welfare system far more advanced than the United States, the British have achieved the remarkable result of turning entire communities of ancestral British people into tattooed, drunken brutes.
I guess we now have the proof of what conservatives have been saying since forever: Looting is a result of liberal welfare policies. And Britain is in the end stages of the welfare state.
In 2008, a 9-year-old British girl, Shannon Matthews, disappeared on her way home from a school trip. The media leapt on the case -- only to discover that Shannon was one of seven children her mother, Karen, had produced with five different men.
The first of these serial sperm-donors explained: "Karen just goes from one bloke to the next, uses them to have a kid, grabs all the child benefits and moves on."
Poor little Shannon eventually turned up at the home of one of her many step-uncles -- whose ex-wife, by the way, was the mother of six children with three different fathers.
(Is Father's Day celebrated in England? If so, how?)
The Daily Mail (London) traced the family's proud Anglo ancestry of stable families back hundreds of years. The Nazi war machine couldn't break the British, but the modern welfare state has.
A year earlier, in 2007, another product of the new order, Fiona MacKeown, took seven of her eight children (by five different fathers) and her then-boyfriend, on a drug-fueled, six-month vacation to the Indian island of Goa. The trip was paid for -- like everything else in her life -- with government benefits.
(When was the last time you had a free, six-month vacation? I'm drawing a blank, too.)
While in Goa, Fiona took her entourage on a side-trip, leaving her 15-year-old daughter, Scarlett Keeling, in the capable hands of a 25-year-old local whom Scarlett had begun sleeping with, perhaps hoping to get a head-start on her own government benefits. A few weeks later, Scarlett turned up dead, full of drugs, raped and murdered.
Scarlett's estranged stepfather later drank himself to death, while her brother Silas announced on his social networking page: "My name is Si, n I spend most my life either out wit mates get drunk or at partys, playing rugby or going to da beach (pretty s**t really)."
It's a wonder that someone like Silas, who has never worked, and belongs to a family in which no one has ever worked, can afford a cellphone for social networking. No, actually, it's not.
Britain has a far more redistributive welfare system than France, which is why France's crime problem is mostly a matter of Muslim immigrants, not French nationals. Meanwhile, England's welfare state is fast returning the native population to its violent 18th-century highwaymen roots.
Needless to say, Britain leads Europe in the proportion of single mothers and, as a consequence, also leads or co-leads the European Union in violent crime, alcohol and drug abuse, obesity and sexually transmitted diseases.
Read the rest here.
5 comments:
Clearly, a lot more abortion is required to pre-emptively prevent the creation, on a massive scale, of mobs of yobs with perfectly pointless, worthless and meaningless lives.
Trouble is, it's not so nice to kill them off after birth, and the poor Brits need a solution now.
ABortion is the best long term solution, and a total cessation of the appalling practice of encouraging breeding by those who cannot afford it and will only give to hopeless, useless and valueless humans, but what is to be done in the meantime?
But of course, it wasn't just the yobs living off charity! So Coulter's analysis is pretty much worthless, too.
Perhaps a simpler, more obvious (and therefore denied?) truth is that it's just another manifestation of normal human nature - murder, rape and pillage when given half a chance!
And if Coulter is seriously suggesting that it requires a welfare state to create riots and the like, she is more clueless, deluded and blind to historical reality than I've often suspected.
I'm no fan of the welfare state, but neither am I a fan of mindless, blind faith in ignorance and deceit.
the reasoning displayed here is false, the root of the issues that have caused the riots are less to do with the welfare state and more to do with conservative policys of the early 80's that were designed to 'eliminate' the working class, these policys were admittedly continued by unapologetic Thatcher supporter Tony Blair under his extended run as a labour prime minister, although with a much more liberal slant towards creating jobs in the public sector.
The idea that we can exist as a nation without maufacturing and industrial jobs on a large scale is a fallacy.
The service sector cannot provide the stablity, community and political envolvement that these unionised professions offered. This is why we have large groups of people (who are no longer just young) that are acutely aware they have no real future and little to lose in a system that ensures them a life of near poverty and rubs it in their face with a heavily publicised consumerist and celebrity culture.
can you imagine any of these people tunring out to loot if they had a secure job down the pit or on the line with their dad, uncle, brother mother etc.
That provided them with a political leadership with their interests in mind and ensured their furure was cared for with a pension scheme.
as it is they are politically ignored and left to find their own way as individuals. We are responsible for breaking up the communities that would have prevented this behaviour.
There is a lot of talk in the uk that these riots are plain crimminality and not politcally motived.
That statement is true, but not complete.
while they may not be politically motivated, they are the result of politcal polices from the last 30 years.
And the British trade unions were never responsible for any violence or unrest? *Chuckle*
When you combine a welfare state with a disarmed public and police who are not allowed to police, this is what you get.
The USSR, the ultimate nanny state only lasted as long as it did because it was a totalitarian police state. But eventually they cracked as well, and for much the same reasons.
As for no prospects of jobs, who would employ these people? I wouldn't, would you? And besides, with the nanny state paying the bills, why would they want to work anyhow?
Am I the only American who finds her support of mass murder by the state utter appalling? Has my nation fallen so far that a talking head can call for a government to murder it's own people and we cheer?
My America is dead. I don't recognize the monster that has replaced it.
Anonymous, I think you're confusing what Coulter wrote with the remarks of a couple of the commenters.
Shooting a few out of control rioters doesn't exactly equate with 'mass murder'.
Well, maybe it does to you, but not to most reasonably sensible people.
Post a Comment