Tuesday, September 27, 2016

we need to have a conversation about class

In the Brave New World Order in which we live there are many topics that are forbidden. There are also, as Steve Sailer has been pointing out for years, many things that we are not even permitted to notice. One topic that falls into both these categories is class.

There is another obstacle to the discussion of class. Those who identify as being on the right or conservative side of politics tend to assume that if you raise the subject of class you must be a socialist or a communist or statist or a collectivist or an adherent of some other -ism of which they disapprove. So the first thing I want to make clear is that I am no socialist. I am to some degree critical of capitalism in its current form but my criticisms are coming from a traditionalist social conservative perspective rather than from a socialistic perspective.

You don’t have to be a socialist to notice that class is as relevant today as it has ever been. Or at least you would notice this except that this is very much one of the things that we are no longer permitted to notice.

If you break the rules and start to notice things you will also notice that the question of class is more complex than it used to be. It’s not just the working class who are the losers in the Brave New World Order, it’s also the lower middle class. Class is still very relevant but there has been a realignment - we’ll get to that later.

The globalist policies that have been pursued by all mainstream parties in the West, whether these parties claim to be parties of the left or of the right, have had a devastating impact on the working class. The destruction of domestic manufacturing industry has taken away the bulk of the jobs that working class people used to do. More crucially it has taken away the stable, secure, well-paid and reasonably congenial jobs that were once available to the working class. And many of these jobs really were reasonably congenial. I’ve worked in factories and I’ve worked in offices and I can tell you that the factory jobs were better-paid, more satisfying and more pleasant. These jobs have now been relocated to the Third World. This is great from the point of view of mega-corporations - they no longer have to worry about paying decent wages or providing decent working conditions. It hasn’t been so good for small and medium sized companies many of which have gone to the wall. It’s been catastrophic for working class people. The jobs that remain are menial, poorly paid and insecure.

Logically this should mean that the devastated working classes would now become formidable opponents of globalism. In fact the globalists have come up with a number of strategies to neutralise this potential political threat. First and foremost has been identity politics. The parties that once represented the interests of working class people are now focused on imaginary oppressions like sexism, homophobia and racism. The gamble was that these new imaginary oppressions would act as an effective smokescreen so that no-one would notice that the working class was being targeted for destruction. So far the gamble has paid off for the globalists. An essential part of the globalist strategy was to co-opt the left-wing media and the left-wing political parties. This was achieved with depressing ease. No-one in the left-wing media or left-wing political organisations talks about class any more. They talk about sexism, homophobia and racism.

There has been a more sinister side to the globalist strategy. It was not enough to neuter the working class politically - working class people had to be demonised. This has also largely been achieved. If the working class gets mentioned at all it is solely to assure us that they ignorant bigoted rednecks who deserve their fate. Most sinister of all is that every part of working class culture has been demonised. Everything the working classes traditionally valued - family, religion, patriotism, even their sports and pastimes - has been mocked and undermined.

This strategy has been, in my view, motivated by the globalists’ fear that the lower middle classes might realise that the Brave New World Order is not working out so well for them. Many of their jobs are being eliminated or relocated offshore. Mass immigration is taking away many of their jobs or being used to turn them into poorly paid drones. If the lower middle classes noticed this they might be tempted to ally with the working classes. To prevent that from happening it was necessary to persuade the lower middle classes to regard the working classes as being evil bigots - as being almost sub-human.

The class divide that matters now is the alliance of the super-rich (the true elites) and the upper middle classes (who think of themselves as being part of the elites) against the working class and the lower middle classes.

All of this has been made possible by the complete destruction of leftist politics as it once existed. The New Left which emerged in the late 1960s and which entirely replaced the old Left has shown great enthusiasm for the project of demonising the working classes. The New Left is of course not left at all - it serves the interests of the billionaires and the mega-corporations. Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton can serve as representative examples and the hatred and contempt they feel for working class people is savage and visceral.

Mainstream conservatives, who also coincidentally serve the interests of billionaires and mega-corporations, have of course been just as enthusiastic in their attacks on working class people.

It’s not the slightest bit coincidental that both the Establishment Left and the Establishment Right have been hysterical in their condemnation of Donald Trump - many of his supporters are those nasty little working class people.

We are constantly told that we need to have a conversation about race and gender. In fact we really need to have a conversation about class.

1 comment:

  1. Very true. One thing that gets on my nerves is the whole Domestic Violence against women aspect. They completely cover up that the overwhelming majority of DV occurs in minority groups and lower socioeconomic areas (poorer people).
    We're expected to believe that an upper middle class white man is just as likely to beat his wife as an unemployed Aboriginal man or a white male former factory worker who has been out of work for years?
    Yeah right. If we could politically identify class as being a major risk factor, then the action plan can focus it's efforts more effectively.
    At present far too much money is wasted on trying to paint all men as abusers when a targeted approach would yield far better outcomes.