Here is an article looking at the evolving impact of the "historic" corporate malfeasance in the industrialised nations as a result of the deregulation of predatory lending practices (essentially legalised theft: thus kleptocracy) in the world's western economies. As I have mentioned in class I have a hard time understanding the lack of any public manifestations of anger in reaction to both the causes of this "crisis" and the corporate welfare cures. How can so many millions of citizens in these "democratic" economies take this theft sitting down? Where are the popular demands (beyond pundits and the left intelligentsia) for economic and political reconstruction? How did we get to the point where workers can see their jobs, pensions, dreams and homes disappear with the complicit participation of their elected representatives without seeking meaningful reconstruction?
The article is an example of how the citizens of the micro state of Iceland (population 320000) have expressed their anger? How do we as social studies educators deal with manifestations of public anger (indignation) in the classroom? Are protesters always reactionaries or hopeless romantics? Is the state always right? How much power do elected officials really have in our age of transnational corporate dominance?
http://news.scotsman.com/world/A-nearriot-and--parliament.4722970.jp
Monday, November 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
To address your last question, this article discusses how protesting has lost its luster.
The author states how protesting used to be an effective method of communal voice, but now it is just an excuse to do something fun.
One point that the article does make that I do agree upon is that many of the people that do protest are college and youth students, however these are the same people that do not participate in voting.
Post a Comment