Exactly, danny, all those miners have to find something else to do, because mining coal is no longer viable. I never mentioned laziness. I did not say it was fun or easy or fair. We (the state) could go on paying them to save their lives and dignity but please lets not pay them for useless work mining expensive coal that no-one wants. Lets pay them for requalification, relocation, pensions. I dont blame them for being bitter about Thatcher, I blame them for looking for scapegoats. Polish coal miners and steelworkers are in exactly the same predicament.

Brexit is a knee jerk reaction to the world not being the way some people want it to be, making it worse.

Radx: true, but the economy IS growing for the polish shop owners in Boston, England.

Its just not growing for the locals who decided 20 years ago that since the factory closed for no fault of their own it was someones duty to take care of them.

Im oversimplifying, obviously, and I do apologize.

The situation in Boston, England will not improve if they chase the Poles out. It will not improve if more local employers find it difficult to sell their produce (they might even find it difficult to find workers once the Poles are gone).

The EU is not great but it is a large accessible market. Im pretty sure Boris is trying to think of a way to stay in right now.

Demanding jobs is the road to hell. If you base your economy on giving everyone a job you end up in North Korea. The Poles in Boston are looking for opportunities, the Brits are looking for a scapegoat.

@bareboards2

I've been operational in a war-zone. Shot at twice, and in a Mexican standoff once, but I never fired my own weapon.

Fact is, other developed nations manage just fine (for the most part) when it comes to things like this. It doesn't help that the US has never and probably will never allow any member of the forces to be prosecuted internationally for war crimes.

I know someone who was in Italy many years ago when a US plane decided to buzz underneath the wires of a gondola (the mountain kind, not the Venice kind, obviously). The tail of the plane caught on the wire and 12 people died, including a few children. There was no criminal prosecution for the pilot, crew, or commanding officers. I mean, just look at all the Wikileaks files on war crimes committed by US soldiers, barely any of them received any kind of judicial review (if any at all did, I never heard of them) including indiscriminate killing of random civilians.

Like it or not, that's a part of the US military culture and they worked hard to make things that way. In Vietnam it was estimated that one in a million shots fired from small arms actually HIT an enemy combatant. They learned it was because fewer than one in ten soldiers even TRIED to hit.

On top of that, the pay is so terrible, it's mostly those desperate to lift themselves and their family out of abject poverty that apply for enlisted positions. They are not well-educated and they are certainly not (for the most part) intelligent, hard-working individuals. The US chooses to spend the vast bulk of military spending on technology, rather than people (after all, it's easier to give kickbacks to your political donors that way).

Well, this is the result. A military with no fear of repercussions unless you're one of the poor scapegoats at Abu Ghraib (and if you think they represent even one tenth of the total personnel involved, you're out to lunch) and you're dumb enough to take pictures of yourself, there's pretty much nothing you can do to the 'enemy' that will get you in serious trouble.

Why do you think the Brits insisted on their own zones of Iraq for the second gulf war? In the first one they fought alongside Americans and suffered more casualties from American fire than they did from Iraqi fire. I talked to a Brit armored officer who was in the first gulf war. He went to introduce himself to the colonel of the American unit next to them, the Colonel stared in amazement at the Scorpion light tank and said, "What the hell kind of Bradley is that?" I can guarantee you, every soldier, from Private to the Colonel of my regiment could have identified every armored vehicle on the battlefield.

I agree, but I think Scalia stands out for the truly atrocious things he's said in the media, hence more vocal hate.
At the same time, he could have just been drawing the media, or a scapegoat all along, because for all I know those 4 other judges agreeing with him could have said equally as terrible things that didn't reach the general populace.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'BriTANick, victims, adultery, secrets, reveal, scapegoat' to 'rose mciver, BriTANick, victims, adultery, secrets, reveal, scapegoat' - edited by lucky760

+ a central bank whose mandate is limited to inflation
+ the lack of a treasury
+ the lack of a harmonized tax system
+ the crippling deficits in democratic control that make it very hard to turn the will of the people into policy
+ etc

The last point is of particular interest if you look at Greece as a shock & awe induced suspension of democracy. Many nations are held in a permanent state of emergency through the war on terror, while Greece's permanent state of emergency was imposed through debt.

Previous governments did what they were told by troika officials, with parliament left aside and judicial decisions left ignored. The return of democracy into some parts of the system caused rather vicious reactions from both the press and European officials. Just look at what Martin Schulz or Jeroen Dijsselbloem said about Syriza officials in the last few days.

Debt is a tool powerful enough to suspend democracy in a heartbeat, even quicker than our famous war on/of terror.

Parliamentary decisions are superceded by transnational treaties and obligations. And if you take the thought one step further, you end up at TTIP/TTP/CETA/TISA. If Greece demonstrates that democratic decisions at a national level still overrule transnational treaties, governments lose a scapegoat for unpopular decisions ("treaty X demands it of us"). Should Syriza manage to end the state of emergency, to return control over the decision back to the elected bodies, it will become infinitely harder to impose draconian or even just highly unpopular measures.

But I digress. Twin Euro blocks (South/North) were part of the discussion, just like parallel currencies in troubled nations. A German exit is still being discussed as well, but I don't think its advocates within Germany thought it through. Switzerland just uncoupled its Swiss Francs from the Euro and it did a real number on their exports. A new DM would appreciate like a Saturn V, instantly shattering German exports. Without a massive increase in wages to compensate through domestic demand, Germany would bleed jobs left, right and center. A fullblown recession.

I'd say it would take very little to stabilise the union, even in its currently flawed configuration. Krugman had a piece this morning, calling one of Syriza's core demands reasonable. And judging by what I have read over the last five years or so, it is. He said Germany would be crazy if they demanded payment on full, no reliefs. And that's where it shows that he cannot follow the media or the political discussions in Germany to any meaningful degree, language barrier and all. Public discussion on economics in Germany stands completely separate from the rest of the world.

Ignorance, stubbornness, cultural bias, a feedback-loop of media and politics, group pressure -- we have everything. And the fact that Germany has been comparatively successful in the face of this crisis makes it practially impossible to pierce this bubble. We're doing fine, our way must be correct, everyone else is wrong.

@speechless

UKIP's support from what I've read, comes significantly from smaller country towns with jobs like manufacturing which are disappearing largely due to continued global trade and outsourcing trends. UKIP's popularity comes from being able to scapegoat these global trends on immigration. I was more arguing from the point of view that countering Farage's demagoguery is best done by explaining why it is incorrect rather than necessary pointing to alternative solutions, although that should certainly be part of it. But citing taxing finance as your one and only solution is demagoguery in itself.

I'm not too familiar with the level of tax avoidance and cronyism in UK politics, at least relative to other rich countries. Would a higher personal or corporate tax rate, particularly in finance help? Maybe. As it is, the UK is a finance hub for Europe disproportionate to its economic size and contributes some 16% of GDP and significantly to the trade balance (boosting the pound to improve international buying power).

Finance is very globalized and business could shift very easily to Hong Kong or New York if taxes were raised to a sufficient extent. I would be not be surprised if a higher tax take could be generated from higher tax levels though, however a political overreaction to tax and regulate finance could be just as damaging as focussing on immigration in the greater scale of things.

Do you have proof that every one of these instances of cops behaving badly were because of orders from high up in the chain of command? Because you know, that would be rather big.

That's what I mean by calculated intent. You have to prove all of this is by design, which has clearly never been demonstrated.

This video...and all the others are anecdotal. The Alex Jones nutbags of the world would have you believe that there is someone, or a cabal of people who are fiendishly steepling their fingers and cackling maniacally at the diabolicalness of their master plan. That's nice and all, but you need proof.

Until then, it's far far far more rational to believe that every single one of these situations can be traced back to very human things like poor training, poor judgement, fragile egos, over worked, underpaid. and actual complex psychological issues all of which are part of the human condition.

Sure, these things need to be addressed, but it's complex and not simple to implement. If it were, they'd have done it by now.

The pundits (aka the armchair quarterbacks) don't like complex issues, they like to try to reduce everything to sound bites. It's far easier to sell the "ZOMG FASCIST STATE THEY:RE OUT TO GET YOU" message than something that actually requires critical thought and tough questions to answer. It's easier to just lazily point the finger at a scapegoat.

Yeah, what would make Aiden Gillen, a man from Dublin, put on a heavy Irish accent? Seemed really out of place for a native Irish man to have a native Irish accent. Good point, ChaosEngine.

Also, you clearly didn't watch the end of the movie where O'Dowd really shows his chops. And I think you missed out on the part where the whole point of the movie is that it's a mystery who is targeting Gleeson and half the fun is deciding who is the culprit. Bernard Black serves as a perfect scapegoat because he is a wealthy dick who might just kill someone to see what it would be like.

I disagree with this on a few points.

First up, "we didn't choose to be nerds". er, yeah, you did. It's not skin colour or sexual orientation, it's personal preference. Literally.

At some point you have to own your choices in life. I've always maintained that "you shouldn't judge people on their beliefs/opinions" is bullshit. It's not acceptable to use "it's just what I believe" as a scapegoat for unsavoury beliefs (racism, homophobia, sexism, etc).

Unfortunately, it swings both ways. If we get to tell racists they're assholes, we must accept that people have the right to judge us on our taste in movies, books, etc. If we can't do that, then we are forced to accept that reading Twilight or listening to Nickelback is not up for mockery. That is not a world I want to live in.

Now, that said, of course no-one should be bullied for liking sci-fi or math or science. Those things are awesome, but not even twilights fans deserve to be bullied.

Next up, the whole "it's not you, it's the bully and their own issues".

Sorry, but no. Some kids are just evil little fucks. They're not jealous or looking for attention, they're just mean. It's a nice idea, but honestly, some people just need to be powerslammed.

Some jobs take a lot of your time, are awesome, and still (maybe) not worth it. How do people not see this? Do you need scapegoats to work at the same place for close to 10 years with very little credit for the sacrifice and value they've dumped into the job; with little self-seeking beyond wanting to maximize your potential and increase the value of a product you feel others are dropping the ball on?

And then to finally make the call that it's not worth it. And to go out in a way that adds value to your life, rather than a flat, depressing thud; the dawning realization that you are now jobless but free...

To be constantly judged by compliance, once radical, ever changing system theory, now turned common place and required for what once was exciting, fresh, and driven by passion...

The passion filter is ON. It's on and it ain't ever turning OFF.

I've worked at walmart as a summer job, along with many other summer jobs. It was a job among jobs; no more memorable or terrible than the previous job. The brainwashing seems to be among the internet folk, who use it as a scapegoat for all the evil in the world.

@VoodooV has it right; if you want to make more than minimum wage, you have to be a skilled laborer.

yeah I'm necroposting, wanna fight about it?

It's not that they're dumb. pointing a finger at a creationist and saying they're stupid is a cop out. It's a little more complex than that.

They're evading responsibility. The god delusion is their scapegoat, whenever something bad happens, They evade and just say god did it. It's not a failure of ethics or a teachable moment, nah, god did it. Acknowledging that god doesn't exist is admitting that we're responsible for all of our past, present, and future misdeeds and failures and you can always count on us humans to avoid responsibility whenever possible.

we've already surpassed far beyond biblical morality by acknowledging that slavery is unacceptable and stoning people is unacceptable, but we still have many more moral struggles to overcome. These struggles are hard, but instead of dealing with harsh reality and answering tough questions, again, they cop out and blame it all on god instead of accepting responsibility for their own actions and failures.

Acknowledging that it's on us to create a just and ethical society that works for everyone and not just the privileged few is too much for some people...just blame it on god and go back to watching the tube. Screw this pesky critical thinking gig.

I dispute the idea that kids emulate stars. They'd be laughed out school if any kid did anything remotely resembling being a poser.

they would emulate a star ironically though.

kids are dumb, but they're not idiots. It's more likely that once again, parents don't want to take the blame for their shitty parenting so hollywood is an easy scapegoat.

gaming/hollywood has always been the scapegoat. If you're a shitty parent, it's far easier to pretend that some outside influence made it happen than to actually ask the hard questions and admit that shitty parenting played a role.

If video games truly had a causal effect, we'd have shootings way more frequently than we do now. Everyone plays video games these days, young/old/guys/girls.

It's no different from when parents back in the day blaming rock and roll for their kids' behavior.