One of the most laughable aspects of modern Marxism and left anarchism is their endless bloviating talk about how they allegedly speak for the working class.
First of all, there is the reality that Marxist or communist parties are virtually dead in the Western world (here, here, and here). There are no doubt more working class people voting for conservatives in the West than for far left Marxists (e.g., for the UK’s recent general election see here), and that won’t change any time soon.
Secondly, there is the blatant reality that Marxists and far left anarchists are badly out of touch with the working class on two important issues: open borders and mass immigration.
Far left anarchists these days seem to be militantly in favour of total open borders, an utterly insane policy, and even Marxists seem to be militantly in favour of unending mass immigration too.
Unfortunately, these things aren’t very popular amongst the working class (see here, here, here, and here).
The only apparent response from Marxists to this is to live in a fantasy world and pretend that these working class opinions don’t exist or working class people have been “duped.” That is not the case, however, and open borders impose severe economic, social and cultural problems.
Even worse, most mainstream left-wing labour parties and Social democratic parties – taken over by middle class cosmopolitans obsessed with neoliberalism and cultural leftism – are in favour of unending mass immigration too, and so working class voters with concerns about the economic, social and cultural impact of mass immigration have to go to the conservative side of politics to get any traction for their views.
This is a major reason for the rise of Donald Trump, the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the Sweden Democrats, the Danish People’s Party, the Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV), the Freedom Party in Austria, the French National Front, and UKIP.
One of the most stark realities of the populist right parties is this: they have substantial working class support (see Evans and Mellon 2015: 3, 5). In Britain, the working class support for the neoliberal New Labour party imploded in the 1990s and 2000s, and many working class voters went to the conservatives, and then to UKIP (Evans and Mellon 2015: 4), not to the far left.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Evans, Geoffrey and Jon Mellon. 2015. “Working Class Votes and Conservative Losses: Solving the UKIP Puzzle,” Parliamentary Affairs
http://pa.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/04/16/pa.gsv005.full
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
good job LK the rational and pragmatic left should listen to you for once otherwise right wing populists will win the elections.
ReplyDeleteMerkel looks to have been drubbed. Will the lesson be learned? I am betting not.
DeleteSadly i think you are right ken b unregulated mass immigration undermine the state and the welfare state and its will evoke reactionary forces which will attempt to atop it
Delete"One of the most laughable aspects of modern Marxism and left anarchism is their endless bloviating talk about how they allegedly speak for the working class."
ReplyDeleteModern Marxism only? Was there any time in the past when marxists actually spoke for the working class?
In the early labour inion movements as well as there is a theory that marxism forced western countries to be more devouted to welfare
DeleteHi Lk. I'm largely on the fence on this topic, and I don't know as much as I probably should, but I have a few questions.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, is it possible to separate refugees from immigrants in general? Here's Steve Keen discussing (among other things) the refugee crisis, climate refugees and those fleeing war zones. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q2SHIZFhFc. I often think that both sides sometimes look at immigrants too much in the abstract.
Secondly, in regards to downward pressure on wages, something which Sanders has brought up, do you think that strengthening collective bargaining and the functions of unions could tackle this issue, or do we need to look elsewhere?
Also, is it possible to seek a middle ground between those who want completely open borders and people like Donald "let’s make Mexico pay for our wall" Trump? Personally I'm frustrated by both sides. Completely open borders advocates have a habit of shouting "racist" whenever people want to even have the debate, but I'm also not fond of Trump and Farage, who at one point said he was uncomfortable hearing foreign languages on the train. Overall, I think European governments should look at the situations abroad, which Steve Keen mentioned, and at home, in terms of issues like secularism, which you brought up in this post: http://socialdemocracy21stcentury.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/extreme-multiculturalism-versus-liberal.html // Wall of text done :)
(1) "Firstly, is it possible to separate refugees from immigrants in general?"
DeleteOf course it is. Many people came from nations were there are no wars or civil conflicts, and where they clearly weren't in danger. As to climate refugees, what is the evidence for this? At any rate, the West can't take millions or even hundreds of thousands of such people every year.
(2) "do you think that strengthening collective bargaining and the functions of unions could tackle this issue, or do we need to look elsewhere? "
Not if you still have open borders.
(3) "Also, is it possible to seek a middle ground between those who want completely open borders and people like Donald "let’s make Mexico pay for our wall" Trump?"
Of course there is: strong national borders without all the hateful rhetoric and an end to pro-big business mass immigration. Implement strong policies for integration and assimilation of people already here.
A thing I don't like about the left.
ReplyDeleteIf the working class agrees with them, then that is popular opinion.
If the working class does not, then they are manipulated by the elites.
Fair point Prateek.
ReplyDeleteBut is it always wrong to say that people don't see clearly their best interest ? and that they can fall prey to demagogues ?
For example, many low paid workers do resent against their unemployed council house neighbor ? Anti wellfare state politicians then used this resentment to cut unemployment benefits and introduce workfare programmes and so on. On the long run, this has two major consequences.
1°) It obscures the REAL question : how do we get back to full employment with decent wages ? (a question which obviously cannot figure on any neoliberal agenda).
2°) If being unemployed is made worse (through cuts, administrative anoyment etc.) then unemployed get incentice to accept ANY kind of work (low paid, uninteresting, dangerous etc.), which is not only bad for them but for whole society :
a) it tends to lower wages
b) it tends to waste skills (since the skilled guy cannot refuse bad jobs and has less time with benefit to search for a qualified job or to get trained to do something complicated and usefull).
On the contrary, when common agree on left wing policies, it does not mean they do so for the best reasons. For example, everyone prefers getting better paid. It does not imply that everyone understands the keynesian effect, one might expect from rising (low) wages.
More generaly speaking,we all have opinions we know to be true without knowing exactly how they come to be true.
And it assumes facts not in evidence, namely that they do not vote their interest.
DeleteIf you claim that immigrants are taking jobs away from the working class, you are making an 'ideological statement' (i.e you are a brainwashed shit talker). I had a socialist block me on Facebook a while ago because I dared question the rhetoric from the left on this issue. He called me a racist then blocked me a few hours later.
ReplyDeleteThe fact is that most leftist movements tend to be bourgeois, and Marxism is no exception; neither is feminism, which to me is the ultimately petty bourgeois movement nowadays (e.g safe spaces etc). They really don't have a clue about how the working class live, not how their ideologies have negatively impacted the groups they are supposedly representing in some form or another.
How excatly has feminism made workers life worse ?
ReplyDeleteFor example, I'm pretty that family planning has made it much better.
A poor family with one or two children is really better off than one with half a dozen. And the chances of those children to improve their lot are far better without than than with numerous siblings.
Do not forget what real feminism is about. More practical freedoms for women (equal rights, healthcare, fair wages, legal and safe abortion etc.). Not some "radical chic" BS for lazy academics.