Culture

The Angry Quarter

Jan 31, 2016 Carl Bildt

In the rich part of the world, roughly a quarter of the electorate seems to be furious, disillusioned, and divorced from "mainstream" political parties and allegiances. Defenders of open societies must rally support for their ideas, uphold the West's values, and defeat the preachers of populism seeking to capitalize on old fears.

STOCKHOLM – Something seems to have gone wrong with politics in the West. In the United States, the billionaire tycoon and reality-TV star Donald Trump seems set to win the Republican Party’s presidential nomination. And throughout Europe, populism in one guise or another is running rampant.

We are witnessing the emergence of what I call the “Angry Quarter.” In the rich part of the world, roughly a quarter of the electorate seems to be furious, disillusioned, and divorced from mainstream political parties and allegiances.

Part of this angry-voter phenomenon can be attributed to local or temporary factors: Politics is always and everywhere a volatile business at times. But it is also the result of long-term trends that are transforming political systems in the West.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Introductory Offer: Save 30% on PS Digital

Subscribe now to gain greater access to Project Syndicate – including every commentary and our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – starting at less than $5 per month.

Subscribe Now

Carl Bildt

Writing for PS since 2009
118 Commentaries

Carl Bildt was Sweden’s foreign minister from 2006 to 2014 and prime minister from 1991 to 1994, when he negotiated Sweden’s EU accession. A renowned international diplomat, he served as EU Special Envoy to the Former Yugoslavia, High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, UN Special Envoy to the Balkans, and Co-Chairman of the Dayton Peace Conference. He is Co-Chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 22 Comments on this article

Mike Riddell Feb 29, 2016

Manchester - Nice piece but what about the tribe coming out of greater manchester that is the best of both worlds...?

I.e the new cooperative movement. an uber-tribe using openness, transparency and accountability to eliminate waste and improve lives for all in the tribe.

Sharing is caring.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Stefan Wiesendanger Feb 10, 2016

"Tribalism" alludes to a dark and distant past rearing its ugly head. Quite contrary to that view, I see current anti-immigration trends as a rationally-motivated consequence of the Social State. That European States can claim close to half of national income for collective infrastructure and transfers is only conceivable if citizens feel that they belong to one family. Opening up the huge present value of simple residency in such a State to immigrants from anywhere in Europe or even worldwide clearly overburdens the existing forced solidarity. We can create an Open Society, but only if we change the Social Contract to one of meritocracy and self-reliance, comparable to the US in its founding days. As a free-market libertarian, I find this quite an attractive alternative.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jordan Dimov Feb 3, 2016

Mostly accurate thoughts, but weak conclusion. If your definition of openness excludes tribalism, you might want to change your definition.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Pavlos Papageorgiou Feb 2, 2016

This is well-written but thoroughly off the mark. The world over, middle-class and working-class voters are stressed not by invading immigrants but by the fact that human labour, in aggregate, is surplus to demand and has lost nearly all its bargaining power. That silent redundancy of all workers has robbed the traditional left of its relevance, handed an overwhelming share of power to owners, and requires new conceptions of work, equity, and welfare to overcome.

In Europe, if not the US, regional societies are becoming insular not for fear of globalisation but because they see the federalist entity, Brussels or Washington, as predatory and not protective of their interests. The people of Europe are running away from the autocratic tendencies of Brussels or Berlin, not from each other. The people are looking for the regional Leviathan to protect their democratic interests but face an elite intent on exposing them, individually, to global market forces.

People are firing their politicians because they see these politicians as captured. Upstarts are filling the void with populism, but the commodity that sells is not hate or tribalism. It's authenticity.
- Stefan Wiesendanger Feb 10, 2016
  
  Your diagnosis is a recipe for continuing disaster. Work is not a surplus commodity if your economy actually produces things that customers want. Bargaining power is moot without companies that actually make a profit. Greece's problems are institutions and policies that kill entrepreneurship. How many Greek products do you see on display the world over, or even on Greek shelves at home? I rest my case.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- John Brian Shannon Feb 3, 2016
  
  +1
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
MK Anon Feb 1, 2016

It is not "open societies" Vs "tribalism". It is "establishment" against "anti-establishment". As no "democratic" party can proposes a different economic model (because all is so much intertwined, in international law, trade agreement and EU law), then there is no option than vote for radical parties. There is no "democratic party" that credibly proposes to stop forced globalisation, and revert the worse parts of it. Worse, almost all european non-brown parties are in favor of negociating the TTIP which is the total and final submission to the new globalised economic order. And now the chief operator of the world wide tax evasion scheme (see luxleak) is now head ot the EU.. and the head of the BCE is an (ex) goldman-sachs director. This is a shame, there are thousands of bright macro-economist professors with no conflict of interests who could fill that function very well.
If you are going to sink the boat, then you ll sink with us. We are indeed "angry", but more than that: "Revolted" and "indignated".
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
hari naidu Feb 1, 2016

Carl Bildt is arguing for an Open Society. Tribalism is not the future and it must be defeated by political means.

The problem is that rise of tribalism is sign that education is failing to educate. The young have become rabid
ideological perpetrators of challenge to status quo...and consider themselves disadvantaged by globalization.

Meanwhile the pendulum has shifted, as austerity has more or less destroyed & created a political wedge between the disadvantaged and the governing establishment classes.
The *angry quarter* therefore reflects this division both within/without a state.

The qualitative/quantitative macro-level global changes, including international division of labor, is more and more favouring mainland China & India. Imagine when their per capita incomes rise in Asia to levels enjoyed in OECD countries...the rising anger at the establishment classes will get worse. What then?

Neither Chinese nor Indians will accept diktat from Beltway; polarization of trade & development politics will get worse - compared to chicked feed today!

American tribalism may invariably manifest its ugly face if Trump triumphs & hijacks US politics. If his ex-wife says he slept with Hitler's speeches under the pillow, what are we to make of him if he gets into the WH!

Carl has therefore dared to look into the (Davos) mirror; and, methinks, he is reflecting the truth.
- Jordan Dimov Feb 3, 2016
  
  As I said in an earlier comment, if your definition of "openness" excludes tribalism, you need to rethink your definition of openness. Tribalism is a fundamental trait of human nature and there is nothing inherently wrong or bad about it. You should always expect to see MORE of it in the world, not less. What IS wrong and bad is patriotism. Patriotism is a powerful social control mechanism that hijacks human's natural tendencies towards tribalism in order to justify the support of artificial political structures that exist solely for the benefit of those "in power". Patriotism feeds on the "us (the good guys) vs them (the others - who must be bad)" mentality in order to justify violence and war in the name of some perceived "higher good". As such, patriotism is quite literally the root of all evil in our modern world.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- stephan Edwards Feb 1, 2016
  
  China an India's wages aren't rising so much as American wages are shrinking.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Niklas Monrad Feb 1, 2016

Hi John Brian Shannon,

I find it amusing that you suggest I visit a "socialist nation" such as Sweden or Denmark, since I am a Danish citizen born in Sweden. I have furthermore traveled extensively in most of the places you suggest are socialist and I can assure you, that none of them are socialist, they are all very much capitalist but with strong social underpinnings or levels of social security nets.

Now we can begin defining what constitutes a socialist society, but one of the main characteristics in my book is strong and broad state involvement in and ownership of productive industries in general. You will not find that in any of the countries you mention. Yes, you will find state involvement and ownership of what some characterize as areas of "strategic" importance, but their overall share of those countries' productive capacity is extremely limited.

Kind regards
- John Brian Shannon Feb 1, 2016
  
  Hi Niklas,
  
  Here in North America, anything politically left of the UK is considered 'socialist' -- however you want to define it is your business I suppose.
  
  We consider the Nordic Model countries socialist, certainly. Perhaps Germany, France, and a few others.
  
  Many people in the United States see socialism and Soviet communism as the same thing. It isn't.
  
  Soviet style communism may have resulted in 'the Evil Empire' branding by former President Ronald Reagan -- but (nominally socialist) Nordic Model nations pose zero threat to our way of life and represent an astonishing success story, for those who care to research it, or to admit it Niklas.
  
  Even the most cursory investigations of Nordic economies and their social and political structures prove how successful they are.
  
  What other country besides Norway has $1 trillion dollars of surplus sitting in a government administered pension fund and ranks #1 on both the Social Progress Index and the UN Happiness Index?
  
  What other country besides Sweden represents the best example for equality for all and maximizes the potential and quality of life of every human being in the country?
  
  What other country besides Denmark sets the standard for a balanced society with a progressively lower environmental impact, and also ranks very highly on SPI, UN Happiness and many other important Indicies?
  
  And both Finland and Iceland, with limited resources and thereby limited economics, increasingly succeed in measurable ways.
  
  For people like me, who only care about actual results, the Nordic Model represents the pinnacle of economic models, thus far.
  
  If you are a Dane and have also lived in Sweden, you've lived better than 98% of the world's people.
  
  All the best to you, JBS
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
John Brian Shannon Feb 1, 2016

Hi Carl,

In the postwar period about one-seventh of the world has lived in relative luxury, compared to the rest of the world who've lived in various states of poverty or worse.

In 2016, about one billion people out of a total global population of 7.2 billion live privileged lives in Developed Nations.

Yet, due to tax laws enacted during President Reagan's time in office (and I'm not blaming him nor his administration, for it was the right thing for the times) and other factors, wealth began to accrete at the top.

"The Angry Quarter" is simply the number of people for whom the present Developed World economy no longer works.

Why? Because their standard of living is falling relative to the rest of the population in the Developed World -- and not because they're doing anything wrong -- rather, the system has imbalances that move wealth upwards.

That great sucking sound they hear is all their hopes and dreams going up in smoke. Why wouldn't they be unhappy?

Politicians must stop talking about it and actually do something about it. The present course is unsustainable and the longer they leave it, the more difficult it is going to be to solve.

In 2016, 1% of the population owns more than 50% of the world's wealth.

By 2030, 1% of the population will own more than 75% of the world's wealth.

And that rate of increase won't stop. By 2045, 1% of the population will own more than 90% of the world's wealth.

It will be too late to do anything about it by 2030. So, if politicians think that they're just going to wait, they're in for a big surprise.

"Let them eat cake," isn't going to cut it this time either.

What China is doing in the South China Sea, what Bashar Al-Assad is doing this week, the price of oil, Cheese Day and The Fourth Industrial Revolution, are all in the final analysis, infinitesimally tiny news bits when compared to the present unrestrained accretion of wealth to the 1 percent which will result in revolution. And not just in one country.

Fixing the broken economic system *now* is everything, everything else is small potatoes.

Thank you for publicly posting your essays at ProSyn!

As always, very best regards, JBS
- John Brian Shannon Feb 1, 2016
  
  Hi Joshua,
  
  And I get that.
  
  In addition to what Carl Bildt has written, I also agree your points.
  
  The more voices on this, the better.
  
  Cheers, JBS
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- Joshua Soffer Feb 1, 2016
  
  In the U.S., most are angry not because " their standard of living is falling relative to the rest of the population", but because their standard of living is falling relative to what it had been for their economic class 30 or 40 years ago. Polls continually show most Americans don't begrudge the 1% their wealth, they just want to see their own incomes begin to grow again. And while those of many political stripes are angry about this, I think the "Angry Quarter" that Carl Bildt refers to is not simply 'the number of people for whom the present Developed World economy no longer works', it's a specific demographic that has responded to this situation with xenophobic nativism. Sanders supporters are just as angry as Trump supporters, but direct their anger not at immigrants but at corporations.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- John Brian Shannon Feb 1, 2016
  
  Short, but interesting article here:
  
  http://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/3-charts-that-explain-global-inequality?utm_content=buffer0b29b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=plus.google.com&utm_campaign=buffer
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Niklas Monrad Feb 1, 2016

The analysis presented here is by Carl Bildt, a supposedly heavy weight politician, who is partly responsible for the shifting sentiment of the electorate. It labels a large segment of the population and conveniently frees himself of responsibility through introspection.

First of all one could question, whether the "Angry Quarter" is indeed a new phenomenon, or whether is has always existed, but in different guises. But let us assume, for argument's sake, that it is a new trend. What alternative narrative could there be to Bildt's?

Let's begin with Socialism, or Communism, as Bildt does; The Left and extreme Left has always harboured a large segment of what one could label the "Angry Quarter", those who saw social and political injustice and had a dream of eliminating it. These people carried the belief, that fundamental traits in human nature could be molded by education and political re-education and a good society would emerge, a society in which no one exerts power over the individual, except by common agreement by all. These people have seen their dreams and illusions shattered again and again by the practitioners of their political faith around the Globe and only the most hard core have clung to their pie-in-the sky dream, with Cuba now being their last dilapidated bastion of hope, crumbling under political and economical realities as an rapprochement with the US is taking place. We all know, that it is just a matter of time before the Revolution is truly dead. These people are happy to point to the fact that Capitalism continues to create one financial crisis after another, but strangely enough they seem oblivious to the fact that Socialist economies simply collapse - every time - leaving behind nothing but chaos and abject poverty, excellent breeding grounds for totalitarian regimes.

The problem is of course, that Socialists and Communists were not wrong in identifying some of the ills of societies, they were only wrong in describing the cures. They still have plenty of reasons to be upset and angry if their moral compass is intact. As many of them would consider it to be a complete surrender of their ideals (and morals) to embrace some form of Social Capitalism they have changed their focus and anger in other directions. Once again the ills that have been identified are valid: Environmental degradation and global poverty and injustice. But with the residual Communist narrative still deeply embedded in their minds - and perhaps with resentment that Capitalism has proved far more resilient than they were made to believe - the focus of their "cures" continues to be that of trying to undermine the capitalist structures that not only cause our global problems, but which are essential for solving those same problems.

On the other end of the spectrum we have the Right. The Right, to whom History gave the proof that they were right all along in dismissing Communist and Socialist ideals. They were right in resisting, with force, the spread of Communism, because even the suffering that was created in that struggle, in proxy wars with the Soviet Union and Communist China, they can argue, was far less than the suffering that would have ensued, had Communism taken root in more societies. Every society creates suffering, but none so much as Communist and Socialist ones have done. But once that has been said, the Right has been void of vision. Perhaps the only vision that was maintained was that of spreading Liberal Democracy to the darkest corners of the World. However, the strongest proponents of that vision, the so-called neo-cons, managed in a few years, and with a few wars, to totally discredit themselves by demonstrating an utter lack of understanding of the societies to which they dreamed of exporting their vision and of the consequences that their actions would bring.

The pie-in-the-sky ideas of the Right, as thoroughly thrashed as the ones of the Left, left a void that now seems to be filled with a resurgence of either religious beliefs, xenophobic demagoguery or a total distrust in the governing elites or a combination of the above.

The ensuing result has been a renewed Left-Right Utopian divide as sharp as ever. One side thinks that it can eliminate poverty, injustice and suffering by immigration and greenery and refuses, once again, to acknowledge human nature, which is, in essence, tribal and selfish, thereby strengthening the very tribal and xenophobic tendencies, which it claims it wants to vanquish. The dream of creating the mutually enriching multi-cultural society is quickly turning into a nightmare for the exact same reasons that the neo-cons failed in their endeavor: a lack of understanding, and an unwillingness to accept fundamentals. On the opposite side, and very much as a reaction to the above, we see a swelling of hatred and resentment. The tribal instincts sets in with full force, and is strengthened by the resentment of being labeled morally degenerate by the Utopian Left who is, once again, convinced that its own moral compass guarantees that their solutions are always right. The result is that both the Right and the Left end up being wrong.

I blame mostly the shrinking Center and the Right for the current, politically unsustainable situation we find ourselves in today. And I do it for the following reasons but not necessarily in that order: Both segments have been unable to countenance the sustained moral attacks they have been subjected to by the Left over the last two to three decades when it comes to immigration and multiculturalism. They have, in a way, been either seduced or coerced into believing that integrating large, culturally diverse, populations could somehow be done easily and with disregard for local resentment, regardless of whether this resentment was “valid” or not. By repressing critical voices for many years the current problems of xenophobia have simply gained force as steam in a pressure cooker. Mr Carl Bildt is one of the main culprits in this regard.

Secondly, the financial crisis of 2007 demonstrated several things: Firstly it demonstrated that the Right was clueless when it accepted the premise that liberalised financial markets would be a force for good. It underestimated what is both the strength and the inherent weakness of the Capitalist system, namely that individuals are selfish and greedy. The individual citizen, who greedily borrowed himself to prosperity, as well as the individual banker who greedily accepted every kind of financial wizardry in exchange for yet an over-sized bonus. It also demonstrated the extent to which governments have become hostage to Big Finance; Governments had to bail out Big Finance because their relationship has become symbiotic. This in turn is a result of the weakness of Liberal Democracy; (selfish) politicians only get reelected if they feed the desires of their greedy electorate, you and me. Everyone wants more and all governments have been happy to borrow trillions of dollars, from Big Finance, to provide. If countries had not had unsustainable amounts of debt already, the additional amount of debt they had to take on in order to bail out Big Finance, would not have resulted in the level of austerity that was imposed on and which infuriated big parts of the electorate. The resulting image of the governing political elites has rightly been utterly devastating, opening up for hateful demagogues of the worst kind to take center stage.

What is worse: the fundamental problem of over-indebted countries has in no way been solved by the pain that societies had to absorb. And with no inflation to eat away at the debt burden there is panic behind closed doors. Printing money and negative interest rates are in fact the very last options left, and nobody knows what to do after that.

In all of this we haven't even touched on the issue of Globalisation, which has meant that middle class and lower middle class wealth has, in effect, been transferred from the West to the East, partly compensated by the above mentioned borrowing. What politicians of all stripes has been telling us is that by enriching China we would in a non-violent way ensure that vast country's transition to a peaceful, democratic society with respect for fundamental human rights. Once again those same politicians have been proved wrong. Indeed, China has not embarked on any wars, but in its new found strength and with its salami tactics in the South China Sea the authoritarian Communist Party has struck fear into the hearts of virtually every one of its neighbours, and the result is an arms race in the region, and a Japan who has felt the need to weaken its pacifist constitution – just in case. At the same time the Chinese regime has strengthened its iron fist grip on its own population while nurturing nationalist sentiments, while doubts about it ability to steer the economy is eroding fast.

The Middle East is a mess just waiting to descend into total chaos. There are so many ways to appropriate responsibility for this, that anyone can pick his preferred narrative and it would be impossible to prove him wrong or right. The fact remains, however one looks at it, and there is no end game in sight. Meanwhile the world is worried about “terrorism” no matter how insignificant the level may be. However, the danger of total chaos in the region and mass migration to Europe with the ensuing political repercussions dwarf any danger imposed by terrorism.

Where Russia will go is anyone's guess, but it is fair to say that it will get worse before it gets better and the same applies to most of Africa, where South Africa is slowly but surely descending into the well known pattern of other one-party states and Nigeria continues to be ungovernable.

So, while the ice caps and glaciers are melting, what visions for a better future is it that our moderate, liberal politicians have to offer us? I don't see any. All I see is petty bickering over petty issues that have no meaning whatsoever, while the big issues are left to fester. I see a lack of intellectual depth and political statesmanship. I see a Carl Bildt and others like him, supposedly our leaders, only being able to offer platitudes, still pointing fingers at others who don't want the “open society” he is still espousing and saying “we have to do something”. I see a deer, transfixed by the headlights of the future fast approaching, unable to move.

I am not one of the “Angry Quarter” but I am beginning to understand the “Angry Quarter” a bit more, and, frankly, that scares me.
- MK Anon Feb 1, 2016
  
  Niklas:
  Speaking of socialists: you say that they " have seen their dreams and illusions shattered again and again by the practitioners of their political faith around the Globe"
  Not true :: As a matter of fact, you are participating in killing the idea. The real truth is that when socialist didn't took power with strength and applying a hard dictatorship, they failed because of the CIA backed coups. Look at the history of latin america: it's coup after coup after coup !! World wide, from Chile to DRC to TImor Leste, there are many utopians who took the power democratically and manage, through exalted speech to obtain the trust of their citizens and were on ways to buid a society which shares values , without having to to go against human nature (which is NOT in essence, tribal and selfish).
  All these attempts were brutally ASSASSINATED. Castro told Allende that he was going to fail because he was too soft and socialism couldn't work without dictatorship (in a US world). He was right back then: The democrat socialists were killed, but the idea survived. It's on the ashes of all those ideas that new parties appear out of nowhere - like Podemos which is grass-root self organisation of citizen. They are my only hope to get out of the crisis from the top. But the establishment is very strong. Siriza for example was defeated by the EU.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
- John Brian Shannon Feb 1, 2016
  
  Hi Niklas,
  
  I enjoyed reading your comment, however if you intend to equate socialism with Cuba (an embargoed country for five decades) you're using a false narrative to make your point.
  
  'All Socialism is Bad' is something I've heard a lot of in my life, but always from people who've never set foot in a socialist country.
  
  And Socialism isn't Communism. Full stop.
  
  Why don't you travel to Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Switzerland, Germany, France, or any other socialist nation so that you can see firsthand how well those societies function?
  
  The following information (with links to prove my assertions) is at my blog, please see link below.
  _____
  
  “Sweden, Norway, Finland and Denmark (collectively the Nordic countries) have a combination of high living standards and low income disparity that has captured the world’s attention. At a time when the growing gap between the rich and poor has become a political hot button in developed nations, the region known as Scandinavia has been cited by many scholars as a role model for economic opportunity and equality.” — Investopedia.
  
  "There isn’t a country in the world that shouldn’t be able to match the high living standards set by Norway.
  
  Norway provides us with an example that all nations should strive to meet or exceed within a few years’ time.
  
  In fact, if we’re doing it right, the stellar Norwegian example will come to be seen as the standard for successful economic policy, instead of the outlier.
  
  But first, let us count the ways that Norway succeeds:
  >>>The highest accumulated revenue surplus in the world, worth $1 Trillion (held in a sovereign pension fund)
  >>>Strong and steady GDP growth (see chart below)
  >>>Very low Debt-to-GDP (see chart below)
  >>>A #1 to #4 ranking on the UN Happiness Index (varies by year)
  >>>A #1 ranking on the Social Progress Index (see chart below)
  >>>Typically a #1 or #2 ranking on the highest per capita income in the world
  >>>In the Top 5 worker productivity rankings in Europe (and by extension, the world)
  >>>One of the lowest crime rates in the world
  >>>One of the ‘least corrupt’ nations. Ranked #5 on the Corruption Perception Index
  >>>An average 2.5% unemployment rate (except during the global financial crisis where it shot up to 5.5%. Not to worry, it’s already fallen to 3.0%)
  >>>Free university tuition for all citizens and residents
  >>>Free universal healthcare ranked 7th in the world (It would rank higher, but maintaining full-service Hospitals in remote regions with tiny populations is uneconomical)
  >>>Virtually 100% of the country is powered by renewable energy except for some remote settlements where a microgrid (natural gas power) is the only choice
  >>>Unparalleled diplomatic credentials. Everyone knows Norwegians are among the best ‘honest brokers’ in the diplomatic world making Norway the ‘go-to’ arbitrators for nations in crisis
  >>>A favorite country of the Olympics committee having hosted successful games twice in recent years
  
  Do you think Norway’s success only happened since 1990 when oil and gas began to be extracted off the Norway coast? Do you think Norway’s success happened by accident?
  
  Well, you’d be wrong on both counts.
  
  The economy of Norway has grown at a rate better than that of any developed nation stock market, just as it was designed to do. And growth rates were steady prior to the large-scale extraction of petroleum in the country, and remain steady.
  Say again?
  
  Yes, you heard right. The growth rate of the Norwegian economy beats many stock market indices as measured over the decades.
  
  Who wouldn’t want to invest in Norway’s public/private investments, in Norwegian business generally, and in the highly educated workforce with its high productivity rate and so much more?"
  
  To read more, please visit:
  http://johnbrianshannon.com/2015/12/15/secret-of-norways-success/
  _____
  
  Socialism hasn't failed, it has succeeded spectacularly.
  
  It was communism that failed.
  
  http://johnbrianshannon.com/economics/if-norway-can-succeed-like-this-why-cant-every-country-040914/
  
  http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/norway-s-sovereign-wealth-holds-lessons-for-canada-1.3002803
  
  Best regards, JBS
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Jan 31, 2016

Ho hum. But we are all living better lives with material and technological goods produced in a place where the force of collectivism makes mass labor cheap enough for us to afford to dream big - such as the shiny toy I write this on. The local collectivists would insist on hoarding a greater share of the toys so we don't dare rely on partnering with them (and unintentionally empowering them) them when we dream big. Now they are all uppity. In past generatiobs they pumped their frustratiobs into the collectivism of the Angry Quarter.

If only we could eliminate collectivism all together?

The answer is to introduce socialist collectivism in places currently experimenting with monopoly market mediated collectivism. Then they would cancel out and the Angry Quarter would disappear . . .
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
stephan Edwards Jan 31, 2016

Could it have something to do with the fact under the current system winners are perhaps 5% the the Davos pro globalization crowd. Leaving large numbers of the blue collar and lower white collars feeling like they have been rectally serviced by a Budweiser Clydesdale much to the advantage of the corporate political elites.
Every Single trade agreement in last 4o years has benefited the elites at the expense of the commons. Every regulatory decision favors a small group over the larger poorer. The Steam has been able to bleed off fast enough. Thus the not uncommon across many nation feeling F--- Globalization, F--- the UN, F--- the EU,
F--- the US Government. Right now it's a strong plurality It is rapidly becoming a majority when it does the Jackboots or an equivalent there of will march Again. Our Governments and corporate/Political elites are not only corrupt they are blatantly corrupt. Every court decision every political decision is made to benefit the elites and their sponsors without even a sliver of justification. The Stock Markets are rigged, the courts are rigged, the elections are rigged. Or do you really expect anyone to believe people contribute millions to hundreds of millions to parties and politicians out of the goodness of their hearts? If you can't figure out why people across the world are angry look around. Stiffing the tax payers with banks bad debts ring bell? Companies that effectively pay no taxes or taxes so nominal they can pat them out of the petty cash box. It's not One country it's pretty much all of the "First World"
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Steve Hurst Jan 31, 2016

So a broadly discredited previously ruling group that is percieved rightly or wrongly as betraying a bunch of the electorate must now morph into a rebel yell. I think not

The rule is not that oppositions win but that incumbents lose. Oppositions get in on default which is why a parade of clowns is occurring
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/16odHVv

The Angry Quarter

Introductory Offer: Save 30% on PS Digital

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

The Angry Quarter

Introductory Offer: Save 30% on PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification