the decline and fall of working class pride

One of the most damaging things that has happened to our society over the past century is the decay of the working class. More importantly, the decay of working class pride has been catastrophic.
It’s popular to date the decline of western civilisation to the 1960s (and it’s fashionable in some conservative circles to blame it all on the Baby Boomers). In fact, like so many of the disasters that have afflicted us, this one started in the early 1950s.
The collapse of manufacturing industry has of course made a huge contribution to the destruction of the working class. The destruction of working class pride however has other roots. The first contributing cause was the obsession with higher education that started after the Second World War. By the late 1950s the absurd idea was already taking root that everybody should have a university education. This is of course arrant nonsense. Universities are useful for people who want to be doctors or engineers or physicists. Most degrees outside these areas are essentially hobby degrees, with no usefulness in the real world. For most people university is a waste of time and money and simply gives people ridiculously unrealistic expectations. What proportion of the population actually needs a university degree? My guess would be around five percent.
The explosion in the number of university students that began in the 50s and really took off in the 60s contributed to the idea that the only jobs that deserved respect were jobs that required a university degree.
Coupled with the higher education boom (and both feeding it and feeding off it) was an increasing disdain for blue-collar jobs. Eventually even blue-collar workers came to share this disdain and came to see themselves as being inferior to white-collar workers, despite the fact that a very large number of blue-collar jobs are both more socially useful and require more skill than most white-collar jobs.
When you add the slow but steady decline of manufacturing industry to the mix you get a gradual but inexorable erosion in working class confidence and pride. 
The situation was however even worse than this. From the 1960s the Old Left, which used to care about working class communities and working class families, began its own decline. The Old Left was sometimes misguided and sometimes unrealistic in its assumptions and was even at times short-sighted and bloody-minded but there was some genuine concern for ordinary working-class people. 
The New Left was to be very different. The New Left was middle-class and intellectual. They despised the working class. The New Left steadily lost interest in economic justice. Now it was “social justice” that mattered. Identity politics took over from class politics. Middle-class people, especially wealthy university-educated elite middle-class people (the ones who dominated the New Left), aren’t very interested in economic justice or class politics. They’re doing fine and they don’t care what happens to any lower down the social scale. Not only are they uninterested in confronting economic issues – they want to avoid such issues at all costs. 
Identity politics on the other is the kind of thing that appeals to them. It’s mostly about advancing the interests of other wealthy university-educated elite middle-class people. Even black identity politics tends to fit this mould. It’s noteworthy that so much of the Black Live Matter activism is not happening in poor black neighbourhoods. It’s happening on college campuses, among wealthy university-educated elite middle-class black kids. 
Of course enthusiasm for open borders has immense appeal to the New Left – it means lower wages for working-class people, it means cheaper servants and nice upscale ethnic restaurants. The downside to mass immigration does not affect middle-class people at all.
Identity politics is the betrayal of everything the Left used to stand for.
And of course as the Left has abandoned the working class, working class pride has fallen still further. The destruction of the family has naturally made a bad situation much worse. Middle-class people might be able to believe that family is optional. For working-class people it’s an absolute essential.
The working class has slowly been transformed into the underclass, which simply leads middle-class elites to despise such people even more. And so the circle becomes ever more vicious. In the US the working class is literally dying – death rates for poor white males are increasing, a shameful thing indeed for a First World country.
I’m working class myself and I can still remember when that was something to be proud of. Those days seem a long time ago now.
Advertisements

the Greens and world government

From Australia’s moonbat-in-chief, Greens leader Bob Brown, comes a proposal for a global parliament for the people of the Earth based on the principle of one person one vote one value.

Interesting idea. Now let’s do what Bob Brown hasn’t done, and think this through. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that this global parliament will have 1,000 members. That’s probably unworkably large but it’s a nice round number.

Now how many representatives would Australia have? About three. The European Union would have about 71 and the US about 45. Canada would have five seats. Eco-friendly politically correct Sweden would have one. North America, Europe and Oceania combined would have fewer than 200 representatives. Add South America and you could say the western world would have around 240 seats. China would have 200 and India about 172. Based on the fact that there are around 1.62 billion Muslims in the world (some sources believe that to be a considerable under-estimate) we could expect to see around 231 Muslim representatives in the global parliament. Given the results of the elections in supposedly moderate Egypt it’s fairly safe to assume we’d see a solid bloc of hardline Islamists that would have at least 150 seats, possibly a good many more. They’d outnumber of the entire representation of the EU and the US combined.

How many seats would Green candidates win? In Australia the Greens could muster less than half the votes required to win a single seat. They might win one in ten of the EU seats. Say seven seats. Let’s be generous and double that.

OK, left-wing parties that are broadly supportive of the green agenda would win a lot more seats. They might win half of the western world’s 240 seats. Say 120.

Now given that the extremist environmentalist policies favoured by Bob Brown and his Green followers really only appeal to white midde-class university-educated westerners how much support could green proposals expect to get in a world parliament? Probably about 120 votes. If a green member of this earth parliament were to put forward the kinds of draconian environmental legislation that get Bob Brown excited, how many votes would they get? The answer of course would be, 120 at the most.

And what about the social causes so dear to the hearts of people like Bob Brown? Things like homosexual marriage. How may votes would that attract in a global parliament? I suspect that a proposal to make homosexuality a world-wide criminal offence would get more votes.

In fact a world parliament would be likely to be very hostile indeed to the leftist social agenda.

If I was a radical greenie or a radical leftist a “global parliament for the people of the Earth based on the principle of one person one vote one value” would be my worst nightmare. So the question is, is Bob Brown more deluded than we thought he was? Or is he really pushing for something quite different from the democratic world government he wants us to think he supports? Is it merely window dressing for a true agenda to dramatically increase the powers of the present unelected, unaccountable, corrupt, bureaucratic horror that is the UN?

Islam and the Left – a doomed marriage

The bizarre alliance between the radical Left and extremist Islam has been greeted with a mixture of despair and amazement by intelligent observers.

The feature that has excited the most wonder has been of course the combination of hypocrisy and self-loathing exhibited by the Leftists.

The strangest element of all however is the truly astonishing inability of the Left to grasp the blindingly obvious fact that from Islam’s point of view this alliance is strictly temporary. In the short term it guarantees virtually unlimited immigration for Muslims into western countries and virtually unlimited welfare payments when they get there, so they can concentrate on planning the jihad without the annoying distraction of having to work for a living.

Once the Muslim populations of western nations reach a certain critical mass the Left will be in for a very rude shock. Leftist parties will find their support among Muslims suddenly vanishing. Muslims will turn to purely Islamic political parties along the lines of the Muslim Brotherhood and other even more extreme Islamist parties. There are already Islamic political parties in some European countries. Do leftists seriously believe that in the long term Muslims will continue to support parties that push the left-wing agendas of atheism, radical feminism, liberalisation of drug laws, abortion and gay marriage?

Leftists truly do live in a dream world.