Tim Lott: Don't blame all this on the greedy City types
It's not only avaricious bankers who put us on the road to chaos. Check in the mirror and you may find a villain much closer to home
Sunday, 12 October 2008
There is something vaguely unreal about the unfolding global crisis. We are at ground level watching mighty towers fall at a distance. We know that the debris is spreading and the dust may smother us. But we do not feel it – yet. But when taxes start shooting through the roof, public services suffer swingeing cuts, unemployment jags upwards and collapsing house prices result in a wave of repossessions, the search will be on for someone's blood. For history tells us that the most predictable response to disaster is a need for expiation and revenge.
For Lenin in 1917 it was the international bourgeoisie – and of course, the iron law of history – that was responsible for the collapse of the Russian state. For America after 1929, it was the Wall Street bankers who were the guilty parties. For Hitler in the 1930s, it was the Jews and the Bolsheviks who were responsible for the Versailles Treaty and the crippling of the German economy. For George W Bush the popular demand for vengeance meant it was Saddam Hussein who had to pay the price of 9/11.
Some of these may have had a degree of accuracy. Most didn't. The point is, a clear-cut villain is demanded by injured parties. A political and economic crisis of this magnitude demands it.
The qualifying heats in the blame game are already well under way. At the moment the favourite villains are, as in 1929, the bankers on Wall Street. In their dark penumbra lie the big corporations (remember Enron?) and the whole financial services industry with their culture of greed and irresponsibility.
We ache for heads to roll. And it was certainly satisfying to watch Richard Fuld, chief executive of the doomed Lehman Brothers, squirm abjectly before Congressional hearings last week. But it was a pleasure somewhat mitigated by the continued safe existence of his vast personal fortune. The Fuld case is instructive. The truth is, the barracking of the bankers is going to provide limited satisfaction. It would be nice if a few of them would throw themselves out of the windows of Wall Street office blocks, but that doesn't seem likely. In the meantime, the free-floating anger and fear is going to seek to attach itself to something. And if it can't get any purchase on the bankers – for, as Bill Clinton said recently, the Wall Street that everyone is railing against has vanished – where will it look?
Republicans, politicians in general, "The System", Margaret Thatcher's legacy, Japan's zero-rate interest policy, Iceland's banking profligacy and the narrow focus of the major pension funds have been gaining popularity in the scapegoat sweepstake.
But the one group of possible villains that seem to have escaped our notice are staring at us in the mirror – ourselves. And as David Cameron recently pointed out, perhaps it is time for us to think about taking responsibility (although of course he was talking about the poor, fat and drunken, not the great British middle classes).
Can it be that there is a connecting line between the current chaos and all the people who endlessly traded up their houses in the absurd belief that this could go on for ever, bought flats to let, snapped up second and third holiday properties? Is there any scintilla of blame to be attached to those who borrowed thousands to buy that new handbag? Who, with their votes, implicitly agreed to a low-regulation regime of the financial system, so long as it appeared to line their pockets. The people who lost their heads, who lost their wits, who lost their common sense and got tangled up in fairy tales. Aren't they to blame too?
You could say that everyone who could got involved, so it was only common sense, and we can't blame those sacred collective individuals "The People". Except that I know there were some people who, although they had the opportunity, didn't buy shares willy-nilly, didn't speculate, didn't trust the financial wizards, didn't even buy pensions or ISAs, didn't buy into the whole gimme gimme gimme culture.
I know because I was one of them, and so were many of my friends. I don't actually think the British are traditionally greedy people and a lot of them/us kept the whole zeitgeist of popular capitalism at arm's length. I don't think any of us are feeling smug – I'm certainly not, and I think the horrible times that may be coming will give no satisfaction to anyone. But I also think we have to recognise that the voters did have a choice.
Many people who are now calling for blood wanted what they could deliver – just as in the Thatcherite Eighties many voters welcomed the tax cuts paid for by the North Sea oil which might otherwise have developed our infrastructure, and bought the shares in the privatised power and transport corporations which later enthusiastically ripped us off. Perhaps it's not only the bankers who have been greedy and stupid.
But nothing has a single cause. The situation we are in now has many causes. The only trouble is the human mind can't deal with complexity as it confronts chaos. And this is what is most frightening about the current situation: however grave, sensible and knowing all those expert voices you hear on the radio and TV sound, no one has a clue what is going to happen next. Fear and panic, as recent events prove, can summon what at the time seem to be hugely improbable events the "Black Swans" that Nassim Nicholas Taleb so prophetically wrote about in his eponymous book on the fundamental unpredictability of historical phenomena.
If political systems follow economic systems into chaos, tax rises, unemployment and falling house prices may come to seem the least of our problems.
And in seeking hysterically for someone to blame, we must guard ourselves against becoming the most blameworthy actors of all.
-
Print Article
-
Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2008 Independent News and Media Limited

Comments
44 Comments
I had nothing, ZILCH to do with the mess. I've been frugal and fiscally conservative all my life and have ALWAYS lived within my means, and paid all my debts quickly. And I am far from rich.
Speak to yourself.
Posted by Rachelle | 13.10.08, 22:27 GMT
At last. Someone said it. Good article Tim and I love your books. It's like "Rumours of a Hurricane" all over again.
Posted by Kevin Monk | 13.10.08, 01:02 GMT
Can't say as I'm looking for anyone to blame.
When my Racehorse Transport business went bust, leaving me with crippling debt, I didn't start on with the weepin' an' de wailin' & looking for someone to blame, although I could have done.
Perhaps because I'm from the world of racing & follow the old adage of 'you win some, you lose some'!
Also, I've never subscribed to the Great British Blame Culture which is now so rife in this sceptred isle.
I would say that everyone in Britain is guilty of one thing though.
We've all stood by and let this happen.
Posted by Gunboat Diplomat | 12.10.08, 20:40 GMT
Well, I bought a property in France. Semi buy-to-let but only semi. It was bought in a ski resort on an 11 year lease-back, a way the French Govt uses to increase beds in tourism.
I've paid my loan down vigorously from my salary (that's why it's semi buy-to-let), it'll be gone by year end. Four years early.
I've not bought in the UK for 10 years. I wish I had done and exited in 2007. That's life.
But: I'll have no debt and net assets of £50 - 100k, although short-term liquidity may be an issue.
I've never bought a derivative, never bought a car on credit cards, and I've never lied about any liabilities to anyone.
I've looked in the mirror and I'm DEFINITELY not to blame.
Posted by Rhys Jaggar | 12.10.08, 19:48 GMT
You are correct, John Davies [15:45 GMT] ... it is a terrible Catch-22 situation. I am tempted to conclude those most responsible for this debacle knew this also, therefore they themselves concluded they might as well completely debauch the system & enrich themselves obscenely.
Was it Stalin who said it is better to tell a truly big lie then keep repeating it? The more weird the better as cognitive dissonance in the minds of those hearing it would be so great they would suffer psychological disturbance & become willing believers if only to assuage the pain of the dissonance.
I do hope you decided to follow my earlier URL link to the Derivatives article. Indeed, plse pass it on to friends.
I am not a Communist or Marxist, but I'm happy to read any article when it is factual & largely free of dogma. I know Britain & Europe could do much without Hank Paulson, but we all need to know more about that beast:
LINK > http: //www.wsws.org/ articles/2008/sep2008/paul-s23.shtml
Posted by Errol Flynn | 12.10.08, 18:24 GMT
Well who should we blame this whole sorry mess on then Tim? The farmers? the people who work for local councils and who face the REAL prospect of losing their jobs (in a sector where redundancy virtually doesn't exist), the teachers, Police etc etc It's the greedy people who work for so called 'institutions' and repugnant greedy bankers ( all over the world - but particulary in the US) that is the reason why EVERYONE is affected, and why EVERYONE will be worse off, not just for a few yrs but at least 10 yrs if not more. We are already in a recession - these people who say we aren't just don't get it. We now face the prospect of heading into a 1930's style depression but worse. This situation already extraordinary could become unparalelled.
So Tim, why do you side with the greedy, amoral, spectaculary decadent city types who eat and drink money like it's going out of fashion. My heart bleeds for those who now won't be able to afford that 1986 Chardonnay for £5000. Life is tough!
Posted by Rob | 12.10.08, 17:00 GMT
Good post, ruined by your own hatred
"It would be nice if a few of them would throw themselves out of the windows of Wall Street office blocks, but that doesn't seem likely.
I personally don't wish to see anyone kill themselves, or indeed take another persons life, and NO, no excuses it was not intended as a joke.
Posted by sean | 12.10.08, 16:12 GMT
"He and others like him have you all fooled because you WANT to believe this is a bailout. No, it is grand larceny, ......... " (Posted by Errol Flynn)
For once I agree with you completely. If we bail the banks out, we are effectively propping them up with HUGE sums of the taxes which we all pay; a very large transfer of resources from ordinary people to the super-rich; (grand larceny indeed!) but if we don't bail them out, banks will collpase, and the entire economy will stop. That would cause so much suffering that it is basically unaccpetable.
The bankers have got us all by the balls. They know it. And don't expect the super-rich at the tops of the banks to suffer any real reduction in their standards of living. They have insulated themselves from that quite effectively. It is only ordinary people that will so suffer; like all the Council workers who may not get paid because the money is in Iceland. Many need monthly pay to cover monthly debts. Will anyone bail them out?
Posted by John Davies | 12.10.08, 15:45 GMT
I wish to post a URL link to an article that encourages proper thinking. I believe it is essential reading for all those who are truly sincere about fixing our essentially bankrupt financial system.
It discusses what must be done about Derivatives.
Please stop watching & listening to politicians posturing. They are a complete waste of time, and YOU know it. It's just taking a while for the reality to sink in.
Hank Paulson is a shameless con-artist who is essentially stealing money from the public (via taxes) in order to transfer additional wealth to his criminal pals in Wall St.
He and others like him have you all fooled because you WANT to believe this is a bailout. No, it is grand larceny, and it is being done right before your very eyes.
If the Paulson (& maybe Brown) grand fraud isn't stopped soon, there could soon be blood on the streets of Britain, USA, Australia, etc.
LINK > http: // www.rense.com /general83/lod.htm
{plse remove spaces I have inserted}
Posted by Errol Flynn | 12.10.08, 15:21 GMT
How in blast did "Hitler" enter this debate? Anybody know?
Do we see the 'Pavlov Dog Syndrome' consuming some commenters yet again? What sense of proportion does a person have, who introduces the canard of "Hitler" every time a certain 3 letter word is raised? Signs of a severe psychological disturbance? Brainwashing? Infantilism?
---------------
One day a frog named Kermit Jagger goes to a bank to get a loan. He talks to a teller named Patty Whack. Patty asks the frog what he has for collateral. The frog pulls out a ceramic elephant, but Patty says, "I'm sorry, but I can't accept that as collateral."
The bank manager had been walking by at the time & overheard the conversation. Looking over, he asked, "What seems to be the problem?"
Patty tells him, "This frog just came in asking for a loan, & all he's offering in collateral is this elephant."
The manager smiles & tells her, "It's a knick knack, Patty Whack, give that frog a loan. His old man's a Rolling Stone."
Posted by Errol Flynn | 12.10.08, 13:45 GMT
44 Comments