I want to read his conclusion first. As printed out, at my font size, this page ten and 11. So there we have it. This is the conclusion now: Years of liberal dogma have spawned “a large, amoral, brutalised sub-culture of young British people who lack education because they have no will to learn, and skills which might make them employable. They are too idle to accept work waitressing or doing domestic labour, which is why almost all such jobs are filled by immigrants. They have no code of values to dissuade them from behaving anti-socially or, indeed, criminally, and small chance of being punished if they do so. They have no sense of responsibility for themselves, far less towards others, and look to no future beyond the next meal, sexual encounter or [soccer] game.
“They are an absolute deadweight upon society, because they contribute nothing yet cost the taxpayer billions. Liberal opinion holds they are victims, because society has failed to provide them with opportunities to develop their potential. Most of us would say this is nonsense. Rather, they are victims of a perverted social ethos, which elevates personal freedom to an absolute, and denies the underclass the discipline — tough love — which alone might enable some of its members to escape from the swamp of dependency in which they live. Only education — together with politicians, judges, policemen and teachers with the courage to force feral humans to obey rules the rest of us have accepted all our lives — can provide a way forward and a way out for these people.
“They are products of a culture which gives them so much unconditionally that they are let off learning how to become human beings. My dogs are better behaved and subscribe to a higher code of values than the young rioters of Tottenham, Hackney, Clapham and Birmingham. Unless or until those who run Britain introduce incentives for decency and impose penalties for bestiality which are today entirely lacking, there will never be a shortage of young rioters and looters such as those of the past four nights, for whom their monstrous excesses were ‘a great fire, man’.” He’s quoting one of the protesters earlier: “Hey, man, it’s a great fire! It’s a great fire.”
Now, that’s the conclusion. The rest of this piece is unrelenting in its assault on these people. Who they are — the rioters — why they are what they are, what has made them who they are, and he beats around no bushes. It’s socialism. It’s liberalism. This is the flower of socialism in full bloom. We got close to what this guy said yesterday when we played the audio sound bites of those two drunk British women saying, “Well, it’s about people that own businesses and the rich, gonna show them we can do whatever we want to do.” I pointed out to you it’s not the haves versus the have-nots anymore. It’s the productive versus the nonproductive. Those are the battle lines.
|BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Norma in Indianapolis. Hi, great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program. Hello.CALLER: Thank you, Rush, for taking my call. I’m really honored to speak to you. The piece that you were reading a few minutes ago where the author was giving all the reasons why there were riots in London?
RUSH: Yeah, that was Max Hastings in the UK Mail online.
CALLER: Oh, okay. I’m gonna look that up. It really opened my eyes, and it got me thinking: Why are they poor people in the United States of America not rioting, and I got to thinking, it’s really our poor people here in the United States are pretty advantaged compared to the other countries, with food stamps and Medicaid et cetera, et cetera. And then I got to thinking — and this is a generalized statement —
RUSH: But wait just a second. Do you know that in the UK unemployment benefits are forever?
CALLER: I didn’t know that. Well, it’s gonna be that way soon here anyway.
RUSH: Yeah. Unemployment benefits are forever. They’re interminable.
CALLER: Wow. Okay.
RUSH: Well, look at it this way. Look at it this way. Let’s see if I can explain this in a simple way. You know, what we like to do is take the complex and make it simple here. So if people believe in a society, that there will be the same amount of wealth no matter they do, whether they work or not — if people believe that there will be the same amount of wealth no matter what they do, then if they think they’re being denied their portion — they are going to take it because they think it’s theirs, and isn’t that the promise of socialism. Isn’t the promise of socialism that the government will be referee and will guarantee equality of outcome?
Churchill aptly described socialism as “spreading misery equally.” But if, if you are a young person and you are raised to believe that the amount of wealth in a nation is just what it is no matter what you do, and you are denied yours… Like that business owner in the UK and this piece by Max Hastings. These people are totally ignorant. They have not been educated. They have been propagandized, they have been indoctrinated, but they have not been educated. There’s no such thing as thinking in these people. They are just barely on the human side of animal, is what he said. If you read this whole thing, he says that in this.
|They’re just barely on the human side of animal, and they have been led to believe that the pot of gold is the pot of gold and it’s always there no matter what they do — and if somehow their portion doesn’t end up with them, then they’re being cheated, and they see people that have what they think is their portion of the wealth, like the business owners or the rich, and they are going to — in some cases like UK — riot to go get it or they’re going to riot to make it uncomfortable for the people who did get their portion of the wealth, ’cause it’s unfair that the rioters didn’t get theirs. Now, to me, such an explanation (because, of course, I provided it) makes total sense. A lot of people agonize, “How can people think this way? How can people behave this way? How can capitalism be so misunderstood?”It’s easy if it’s never taught. If all you’re taught is that anybody who has anything came by it in an ill-gotten or criminal way — if you’re taught the premise of social justice and economic justice is that a portion of everything is yours — but somehow you don’t end up with it? And, by the way, who is the agent that’s supposed to provide it to you? Think of it that way. You’re raised not to think. You’re being propagandized and you’re being indoctrinated, and you’re told, “In the land of economic justice, what’s rightfully yours is rightfully yours.” It’s never really defined. You’re never told you have to work for it. It’s just there! But you live and you grow up, and somehow, if you don’t do anything, it never gets to you.Your portion of the wealth of the society never gets to you. You say, “I’m being cheated! I… I am being scammed,” and who is scamming ’em? Not the government because they’ve been told the government is gonna provide all that for ’em. The government is the agent, the referee of all of this fairness, of all of this justice. So when the government doesn’t take these steps because it can’t, because the government does not create the wealth but these people are raised to believe it does — when they’re just barely on the human side of animal and they don’t know anything, and they haven’t the slightest idea because they have no sense of personal responsibility how to acquire anything — if they end up feeling deprived, whose fault is it?
It’s certainly not the government because they’ve been raised, they’ve been propagandized to believe that the government is Santa Claus or whatever provider agent that you want to use. So if they don’t end up with what they think is their fair share, it’s not the government’s fault. It’s somehow that business owner’s or that corporate jet owner’s or that rich person down the road or the doctor or what have you, or the CEO at AIG, or some Wall Street fat cat. The closest we to this in this country is a government union worker. (laughing) If they don’t get what they think is theirs, what do they do? What are they prone to do these days? Raise hell, riot, threaten!
But in the case of the UK, these are really… He describes these people as “feral humans,” feral humans. Folks, it really is simple to understand. It may be tough to accept, but it’s simple to understand. If you understand, if you accept that this is how the young people of the UK had been — call it “educated” if you want, just to use the term — it’s the same thing here. There’s a certain as amount of wealth out there no matter what you do. A corporate jet owner somehow has gotten more than his fair share and somehow you don’t even have yours at all, and that ain’t justice.
And of course you believe in government first, last, and always ’cause the government is the justice so that it must be people in government who are standing in your way, in this case the conservatives, the Republicans. So at that point in time when the government says, “You know what? We can’t afford all this anymore,” and they start cutting back on food stamps, education benefits, or whatever, and then these people that haven’t done anything their whole lives ’cause they don’t know how now end up with even less than what they started with, which was nothing, then it’s utter panic, anger, feral behavior, and bingo! You have what’s happening in the UK. Stoked, by the way, as well. It’s not entirely spontaneous here. It’s being stoked by people that have vested interest in all this chaos as well.
|BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: That’s correct. The UK has guaranteed income, open-ended unemployment benefits. You can lose your job at age 20 and still be paid unemployment at age 60. Yeah. Businesses have to keep paying you the whole time. (interruption) You guys are looking at it two steps behind. You guys say, “My God, how can that be? How does that math work out on that?” It doesn’t! You’re exactly right. What we’re seeing in the UK is the manifesting of how that is impossible, ’cause they’ve had to cut back other things. Unemployment wasn’t the only thing that was interminable. Education. Look what happened last December when they started forcing to pay a little bit for their education. They rioted again there, too. I guess this is turning into a fascinating subject.I’m presenting this in as easy a way to understand as possible, and my own staff is greeting me with frowns and looks of confusion, and in some cases utter despair. Of course it makes no sense! Of course it makes no sense! You’re trying to make sense of it? I’m not trying to make sense of it. I’m trying to explain to you the absolute folly of it. Why socialism doesn’t work. Why we’ve gotten to the point that we’ve gotten. I don’t know of an easier way to explain it. You have a bunch of young people… We’re facing the same thing here based on the way they’ve been educated. They don’t think they have to work for what they get. It’s just there! The wealth of a nation is just there, and they get their portion. Whatever they do.
Economic justice, social justice. They get whatever they want, and if it doesn’t find its way to them — which it won’t; money does not knock on your door; opportunity does, but money doesn’t — then they have fits. They’re clueless. They don’t understand. ‘Cause they see other people with money, and they don’t equate it with work. They equate it with existence. They equate it with entitlement. The way they look at people with jobs is, “My, that’s even more unfairness! Somebody in the government’s being really unfair. Why, not only do those people get their share of the wealth,” and, by the way, they don’t use that term. They don’t know “share the wealth.”
That’s my term to explain it in terms that you and I converse in. These people I’m talking about don’t even understand the term “share of wealth.” They just think that there are certain amount of dollars out there, there’s a certain amount of stuff, that there’s a certain portion they get. Everybody should get a BlackBerry, everybody should have a car. Everybody should have a house — and when that doesn’t happen to them, there is no economic justice. And since the government they’ve been told is the guarantor of such things, it can’t be the government that’s screwing them. So it has to be that have the houses and the cars and the BlackBerrys that are hoarding it all from ’em — or, even worse, it’s the conservatives!
It’s those people in government who they’ve been told don’t want anybody to have anything. I’ve got an acquaintance who recently reentered the investment business, and he’s trying to reestablish his business by actually going door to doob in his little neighborhood, knocking on doors and trying to get people to invest, and he asked me what to say to this one guy. He knocked on his door, and this guy has $100,000 to invest, and mid-sixties or close to 70, and this guy was just fit to be tied. Not that my friend showed up, just, “You tell me: What have the Republicans ever done for the workingman.” My friend said, “What would you say to this guy? ” So I wrote a reply back. There are people who are in their sixties who have this mentality. You know them. They believe “the Democrat Party’s for the workingman!”
What does that mean?
It means that the Democrat Party’s gonna make sure you get your car and that you get your apartment or whatever. You’re gonna get it all — and if you don’t get it, it’s somebody else in government’s fault or the corporate jet owner who has more than he should have. You ask how in the world people can support tax increases? If they think somebody’s gonna get punished as a result, they’ll be damn well for it! Because of the people we’re talking about, their level of sophistication is zero. All they have on their mind is getting even with people who have more than they do — and whoever promises ’em that they’ll do that for ’em, that’s who they’re gonna vote for. It’s happening in the UK. And of course the people making the promises, “We’re gonna tax those people, and they’re gonna pay,” even after all those promises, the rich still have their jets and the rich still have their businesses and these people get even angrier ’cause there is no pain, and they want to see the pain!
The only pain is their own.
They’re the wards of the state, and they’re the ones that have been lied to, and it’s the Democrats that have done it to ’em.
RUSH: No, the only thing the Democrats care about is just say enough every four years to make sure these same “feral humans” keep voting for them on the same false promises. It’s all they care about. They don’t care what actual circumstances people’s lives end up being.
|BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Lubbock, Texas. Hi, Brian. Thanks so much for waiting. Great to have you here.CALLER: Hello, sir. I’m elated to be speaking with you. Before I get in trouble, I just am required to give a shout out to my mother-in-law in Anchorage. She listens to you. I’m going today, my mom sent my younger sister down here to finish her summer school. I’m tutoring here through her online chemistry course, and I’ve kind of about had it with the teacher. She can’t write, she can’t read the answers that we provide, and she can’t perform basic algebra like isolating variables and writing equations differently.
RUSH: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Wait a second now. Your young sister’s teacher can’t write?
CALLER: No, she’s got words that are just completely wrong, I mean sometimes —
RUSH: What does she teach?
RUSH: Chemistry, and she can’t read?
CALLER: Apparently not.
RUSH: Does she know how to make crystal meth at least?
CALLER: I haven’t touched that one.
RUSH: You better find out. ‘Cause there’s a reason she’s got the gig. I’ve watched the show Breaking Bad. You ever seen that show?
CALLER: No, sir.
RUSH: Well, check it out. It’s about a chemistry teacher who’s diagnosed with cancer, and he realizes he doesn’t have anything to leave to his family and his original diagnose is not long so he sees a crystal meth deal goes down so he starts cooking crystal meth and ends up making the best stuff in New Mexico. It’s kind of a crazy premise. I think it’s on AMC on Sunday nights. So you better ask that. You have a chemistry teacher that can’t read?
CALLER: Well, I mean, she told us in one of our answers to a test that I helped my sister draft that we didn’t use a concept and we very clearly defined it and used it. So she either didn’t bother to read the answer or she doesn’t know enough chemistry to identify it.
RUSH: Didn’t use the…? Conscious of reading, chemistry. This is amazing.
|BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: I have been thinking about something here. When I was explaining in our last busy broadcast hour, the reason for the London riots — the whole concept that we have, according to Max Hastings in the UK Daily Mail referring to the protesters there as “feral humans.” They’re just barely on the human side of animal.I was trying to explain it to people: Look, there are a bunch of people have not been educated. They’ve been propagandized, indoctrinated, and they think that there’s a certain amount of “stuff.” You and I call it national wealth. But they look at it as a certain amount of stuff out there and that everybody gets their portion, whether they do anything for it or not. They’ve been raised: “That’s economic justice,” and when they don’t get their stuff, do they think they’re being cheated? They see a business owner or corporate jet owner, somebody has stuff, and, “Wait a minute! Wait a minute! How come they got their stuff and I don’t?” because they don’t understand the concept of work; and they think the people that have jobs also are being treated unfairly.
It’s not fair that they have all that stuff plus a job, and these people don’t have anything. It’s hard to understand if you will not admit what socialism and liberalism are all about. But what underlies it all at these protests these leftist rallies is a tribal philosophical belief that what’s yours is mine. That’s what they think. And not because they work for it. Whatever you have that they don’t have, is theirs. When you see these fires in London, what are you actually seeing? You are seeing private property burn. When you see protests in Israel, you are watching mobs demanding that more private property be turned over to the government so that the government can redistribute what was your property so that your property can become theirs.
Why? Because liberalism’s quiet message is that whatever is theirs is really yours. That’s what people are taught. Those who have more than you do are greedy. They cheated; they’ve stolen it from you. They’ve been taught that there is an immorality to the fruits of your labor. Somehow it’s not fair, it’s not right. So when we see protests and rioting in Greece, Spain, Portugal, London, we’re witnessing mobs demanding something for nothing — and the “something” they want is private property. Because of this tribal philosophical belief that what’s yours is theirs, and personifying it — if I’m them: what you have is mine — then I don’t have to work for it. Everybody is supposed to have everything equally. That’s what they’ve been told.
So these screaming, guttural demands on taxable income — the threatening demands for higher taxes on stocks and homes and businesses — the outright looting of homes and businesses is aban all-out assault on private property, and liberalism has promoted the idea that what is yours is really theirs. All money is Washington’s! What you end up with is what they graciously decide you’re gonna get to have. That’s liberalism. Everything is theirs, and you are assigned what you get — and we in this country have a president who uses private property has props to sell his plan to confiscate even more private property. There’s nothing sinister about private jets, but they have become the symbol for the reason to raise taxes, and they get angry and have riots (and make no mistake: Higher taxes are a government approved confiscation of private property. Money is private property).
|Read the Background Material…|
|• UKDM: Years of Liberal Dogma Have Spawned a Generation of Amoral, Uneducated, Welfare Dependent, Brutalised Youngsters – Max Hastings
• BBC: London Rioters: ‘Showing the Rich We Do What We Want’