Monday, June 07, 2010

Globalisation In One Country

Jon Cruddas, 2005 :

“… immigration has been used as an informal reserve army of cheap labour. People see this at their workplace, feel it in their pocket and see it in their community – and therefore perceive it as a critical component of their own relative impoverishment. Objectively, the social wage of many of my constituents is in decline. House prices rise inexorably, and public service improvements fail to match local population expansion. At work, their conditions, in real terms, are in decline through the unregulated use of cheap migrant labour.”

Billy Bragg, 2010 :

“Everyone else in London benefits from multiculturalism and cheap labour…”

Karl Marx, 1847 :

“The main purpose of the bourgeois in relation to the worker is, of course, to have the commodity labour as cheaply as possible, which is only possible when the supply of this commodity is as large as possible in relation to the demand for it”

Commenter Jim on Liberal Conspiracy, 2010 :

“Where I live, there is a meat packing plant that has provided many with stable employment over the decades. Of course, with the large influx of Eastern Europeans they have steadily displaced the locals from this factory and there is a surplus of labour in the area. Employment agencies have descended on the area like vultures and almost completely ‘causalised’ the workforce around West Lothian to the extent that the job centres are littered with zero hour contract jobs.

A friend of mine who has worked in said plant for over thirty years sees young men coming in on the Monday work for three hours, then sent home to sit by the phone in case they are needed during the week.

This was exactly the type of thing the Labour Party was set up to tackle. These conditions, nauseatingly described as ‘modernisation’ show up the failings of the NL ‘project’. Whilst they were swanning about getting middle class men in public sector jobs paternity leave, ordinary working class people watched as their terms and conditions were slashed to Victorian levels. These people (rightly or wrongly) feel immigration undercuts their living standards. Is it right that in this Country that we have reduced people to the condition of day labourers?”

(see also this post)


kraut said...

Doesn't anyone else watch BBC documentaries anymore?

Guess everyone's too busy watching "reality" TV shows.

Anonymous said...

Surprised you didn't quote Ed Balls comments or Sunny defence of them

we can’t afford to ignore people’s perceptions whether we like them or not. We have to accept that we lost the battle in shaping them in our favour.

moriarty said...


I love the subtle irony in your post.

dearieme said...

Serves the buggers right for voting Labour.

Sgt Troy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Sgt Troy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rob said...

Yet look at the voting patterns in Lothian - they return Labour MPs with skipfulls of votes. They make the rod for their own backs.

Anonymous said...

Steve Sailer:
The best political book published recently in the English-speaking world has one of the worst titles: U.K. Tory MP David Willetts’ The Pinch

Martin said...

The commentor 'Dearieme', writes

"Serves the buggers right for voting Labour."

Thus speaks someone who might just be either in line for or even collecting The Mother Of All Gold Plated Public Sector Pensions. His contempt for those who pay it is palpable.

One of our culture's greatest mistakes has been its failure to cull unproductive hypocrites from our universities. But I suppose some cultures are more productive than others. They're like pets; the more time you spend around them, the more you start to resemble them.

Anonymous said...

I think Dearieme has a point: why do millions of people still vote for a party, New Labour, that despises them? Couldn't they have at least abstained?

Martin said...

I don't think he has a point. I think he's an anonymous hypocrite. That the party for which the subjects of his criticism, the same people who pay for the bread in his mouth, cast their votes ultimately acted in bad faith is no assurance that any other would have acted in good faith.

Anonymous said...

What does Martin mean by "the party that ultimately acted in bad faith" ? No governing party has ever asked the British people to vote on the issue of allowing mass immigration. But only the Labour Party (and their toadies at the BBC) has ever made a fetish of actually promoting a racially-diverse, multi-cultural society.

Furthermore, Labour went on doing it for the past four general elections. If the WWC went on voting for them, they have only themselves to blame, as Dearime points out.

And no, I am not in the public sector, and I have always earned my own living.

Martin said...

Anonymous 2:08,

Who else would they have voted for? I mean, come on, for God's sake! After 18 years of Conservative government in which their livelihoods had been destroyed and their communities pushed to extinction, do you really think the 'WWC' (a hateful acronym that sounds like a cross between a toilet cleaners union and a wrestling league) would have voted for anyone else BUT Labour?

The whole 'It's their own fault' argument - by referring them to as 'buggers', Dearieme indicates that he doesn't even consider them to be worthy of consideration as fellow citizens and fellow human beings - is a sort of mental masturbation. It makes you feel good for a moment, but is ultimately unproductive. Whatever business you're in, I fell happy for you. Good for you. Award yourself a British Empire Medal for having stayed independent of the state. Dearieme hasn't, but has still has got a hell of a lot to say for himself. Just remember that you didn't do it all by yourself, that you had to rely on other people and that you could lose it all in an instant. If you think that can't happen to you, it might yet.