, , , , , ,


Turning immigration into a tool of social engineering | Essays on the 2010 election | Immigration | Open borders campaign | Social policy and the welfare state | spiked http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/8335#.VYjSknx6eGM.twitter


An excellent essay on the Blair government agenda, which was rather devious. The oft-quoted aim to “rub the Tories faces in diversity” in the light of this article could be re-interpreted as “rubbing the working class’s faces in diversity”.

This is how I unravel it.

Thatcher pulled the rug from under Labour by appealing to the aspiring working class. That is all who under our supposedly meritocratic, free, fair-play, Western democracy, unlike totally rigid other cultures, had the option to raise themselves out of the godawful living and working conditions of the working class, into a reasonable, decent quality of life. Labour saw those who did, then voted Tory.

Open doors immigration, alongwith favouring migrants over the native working class, was Labour’s revenge against the working class for not supporting them. The logic appeared to be – let working class people improve their conditions, then they won’t vote for you. Keep the working class in the gutter – and they will. A win-win situation.

Where Thatcher won the working class voters with the promise, though not necessarily the fact, of personal betterment, Labour’s migration policy told the working class Labour’s intention was to “keep them in their place”. Not so different from the Tories then.

But Labour got their sums wrong. Labour’s own middle class bias is revealed in the class prejudice that the working class are comprised of useless, idle dummies, not a majority of actual “hard working” people, working hard, getting very little for it and desperately trying to improve their conditions.

Possibly Labour lost this last election precisely because of their patronising, condescending and ignorant assessment of the working class and their clear abandonment of working class interests. Their appeal was only to fringe groups – all minorities, migrants and the unfortunates that the working class is represented by in the media. They may also have miscalculated the migrants vote. Hard-working Poles do not aspire to remain in the gutter. And Muslims are repelled by gay rights.

The migrants as far as bettering themselves have identical interests to the working class. So they are not going to vote for a party whose policy is to keep everyone at the bottom – at the bottom.

Blair’s Labour was less “New Labour” than “New Tory”, but without the hope (although her policies did the opposite) of Thatcher’s appeals to self-betterment.

Regarding open-doors immigration, I cannot see that this is a policy that can do anything other than reduce these small  and already over-crowded islands, into a 3rd world slum. People will naturally migrate from bad to better, from poor to rich, from anarchy to order. Considering the state of much of Africa, the Middle East, India and China, there are billions of people who would come to Britain if they were allowed. And the people whose work and living options will be reduced if the numbers increase will be the working class, not the wealthy elite who will benefit from ever cheaper labour and ever higher rents.