Most commentators are rightly describing the surprise “Brexit” vote as an exposure of deep social divisions in Britain.
But why would a very large section of the British working class side with some of the most reactionary, racist elements of the British ruling class to thereby create a majority vote for Britain to leave the European Union?
The answer comes from the neo-liberal economic policies of the past generation whereby the rich have waged a relentless war on the working class using both the Conservative and Labour Parties to front their filthy scheming.
The working class across the developed world has seen their share of GDP (Gross Domestic Product – a measure of the wealth produced each year within a country) drop dramatically.
In New Zealand the workers share of GDP dropped from around 55% in the 1980s to about 45% today meaning households must work ever longer hours, on lower pay rates, to get enough income to sustain a reasonable standard of living.
The inevitable result has been standards of living have dropped with millions of workers and their families driven into poverty across the globe.
In the Brexit vote these workers gave the finger to the entire British political establishment – Conservative and Labour Parties alike. It was a protest vote of grand proportion.
Essentially the same coalition of the reactionary wealthy with strong working class support is a feature of the Trump campaign for the US Presidency. Just as in other countries the US working class has been hammered and smashed. No less than 40 million Americans now live below the poverty line in the wealthiest country on the planet.
Having been so brutally betrayed, why would anyone in the working class in the US or Britain be expected to vote for the likes of Hilary (Wall Street) Clinton or follow the British Labour Party’s call to remain in the European Union?
In both countries the reactionary wealthy are portraying the problem as immigration – people from outside coming in to take working class jobs. In times of acute social stress it is always those who can most easily point to a scapegoat who will see their political fortunes enhanced. In the US and Britain it is Donald Trump and Boris Johnson who are the immediate beneficiaries of the racist xenophobia they have roused.
Here in New Zealand it is Winston Peters who wants to don the Donald Trump/Boris Johnson political suit. Besides blaming immigration policies and immigrant workers for our economic woes, Peters has long-term associations with some of the most reactionary elements of New Zealand business such as the infamous anti-union, anti-worker Talley Brothers.
Until the left is able to provide a coherent, message that it is the greed and corruption at the heart of capitalism which is to blame for the appalling situation low-income families find themselves in then we shouldn’t be surprised at the Trump/Brexit developments.
I tend to think the reason why the working classes have been voting for the politicians who work against their interests is because said politicians have been appealing to their prejudices. Ronald Reagan was the prime example of this. He came to power as a reaction by the conservative working classes to progressive liberals, Afro American rights and so on. Now the conservative working classes are fed up with their position but instead of voting for a progressive agenda have chosen to go with someone else again who appeals to their prejudices. I think a lot of the responsibility lies with working class voters themselves
Oh dear. Because the working classes don’t go along with “progressive” ideas its their fault. Their “prejudices” have been appealed to…..I’m appalled by the inverted bigotry here.
The biggest challenge for some on the left is not understanding the complexity of some of the issues there are, and by simply not accepting that significant immigration can put immense pressures not only on housing, infrastructure, health, education, social services, on natural resources, but also on wages people earn and jobs that may be available. In minimising or dismissing these challenges, I fear the left makes a mistake.
That is not to mean that immigrants are the problem themselves, and it does not mean that people raising concerns are xenophobic or racist, it means, people are afraid of more competition for what they are used to be able to access.
This is what drives many disaffected right into the arms of such like Farage and his UKIP in the UK, into the arms of idiots like Trump in the US, and into the arms of Peters and NZ First in New Zealand.
So some kind of rethink may be needed, to address issues in a fair and sensible way, by not being racist or hate preaching, but by being objective and targeting criticism at those who are responsible for things getting out of hand. That is the government of the day.
A radical “internationalist” would call for the abolition of all borders and completely free travel for all human beings, but how would that work out, I wonder?
“A radical “internationalist” would call for the abolition of all borders and completely free travel for all human beings, but how would that work out, I wonder?”
It only seems like a radical proposal because state borders have become so militarized over the past few decades. When the parents of my daughter’s mother came from Oz to NZ in the early 1980s, they didn’t even need a passport. It was about the same as moving from one NZ island to the other.
Yes, migration between cities in NZ can cause some infrastructural problems, such as the present over-population of Tamaki Makaurau, but would anyone accept setting up border controls and immigration limits between NZ regions to solve these problems? Papers please comrade!?! If not, then why do some consider this an acceptable solution to the logistical problems caused by international migration? It should be seen as a fundamental right of every worker to migrate to any country that imports products from the country they currently live in.
Sounds good on paper, but a country like China or Russia or Syria could readily produce a million aspiring migrants per year. NZ could accomodate them, but not without substantial changes to our way of life. In the real world immigration rates over 5% generally produce violence. NZ is not the UN – our politics needs to respect local interests.
“It only seems like a radical proposal because state borders have become so militarized over the past few decades. ”
I think you are somehow not quite up to date.
The EU abolished many internal borders with the Schengen agreement, so you did not need a passport or even ID card to cross borders, and only if the police may have wanted to ask you some questions, did you have to present an ID, that would have been anywhere within, not necessarily near a border.
Also have there until recently not been that much enforced, fenced borders between EU countries and those outside, only recent refugee movements brought a sudden change.
As for the US, yes they have a rather enforced border to Mexico, but most of the Americas have fences, “militarised” borders, nor do most countries in much of Asia, apart from where check points are on roads, in ports and at airports.
Where are the “militarised” borders, rather between Israel, around the Spanish enclaves within Morocco, between North and South Korea and few other places.
“Yes, migration between cities in NZ can cause some infrastructural problems, such as the present over-population of Tamaki Makaurau, but would anyone accept setting up border controls and immigration limits between NZ regions to solve these problems?”
Where in my comment did I talk about such “controls”?
I mean, if we have NO checks and controls at all, if other countries have NO checks and controls, which means immigration policy that is enforced, with some rules, then we would have to allow ANYBODY in, at any time and in any numbers, so do you support this?
I do not, that is my point. But having controls does not equate being “racist”, as some people seem to misinterpret managed immigration or controlled immigration.
Winston is not a racist, the MSM use this ploy to discredit Winston, he is trying to make the public aware that immigration is putting pressure on our housing stocks, our infrastructure, our hospitals and health services and they are competing for jobs with our own people.
I don’t think people should qualify for residency by the size of their bank accounts and how many residential houses they can afford to buy?
Like Winston says even discussing this issue here in NZ gets him labelled as a racist yet it is being discussed around every lunchroom table here in Auckland during smoko breaks.
Winston is not a racist, the MSM use this ploy to discredit Winston, he is trying to make the public aware that immigration is putting pressure on our housing stocks, our infrastructure, our hospitals and health services and they are competing for jobs with our own people.
I don’t think people should qualify for residency by the size of their bank accounts and how many residential houses they can afford to buy?
Like Winston says even discussing this issue here in NZ gets him labelled as a racist yet it is being discussed around every lunchroom table here in Auckland during smoko breaks.
To be blunt, people are by nature somewhat “tribal”, hence we have all these trends of people wanting to identify with others, in a movement, a group of like minded, it shows in sports, in work environments, in classes that exist and also in clinging to cultural, social, ethnic and politican “values” of whatever types.
It is part of being human, as a social animal, growing up in families, larger or smaller, to have a need to feel to belong and identify with others around them, with groups. Individualism may rule these days, but there remains always a tendency and need to identify with and follow others.
And when people’s environment changes more than they like, or if they get exposed to imposed changes they have no control over, the fight or flight mentality sets in. The cause can be manifold, economic, social, due to changes in natural or less natural environments.
Being told what to do and how to behave and think by others that may also be perceived as elitarian, as representing powers in control, whether state representatives, governments, politicians in general, that can create feelings of not only suspicion, but real resentment.
Hence I feel we have a social backlash in parts of the population, evident in the UK with the Brexit vote against the EU, and also internal frictions, and it is becoming more evident in New Zealand.
So some reject what they perceive as “political correctness”, as “liberal know it all” messages, and they turn against it. New phenomenons like Trump in America, some others that have been active for a while, such as Wilders in the Netherlands, Marine Le Pen in France, Farage in the UK and similar politicians in Hungary, Poland and many other countries, they get followers by disgruntled people who must fear something and behave increasingly like football hooligans, as mobs and new “tribal” groups, that feel strong to “send a message”.
It is overly idealistic to consider us humans as inherently being mature, conscientious, balanced, well meaning and friendly, as we all have a dark side, some more than others. Under stress the dark side comes out, rather often.
With a world that brings more insecurity than ever, where most are mere “numbers” in ever more controlling, greater systems, only there to fit in like tiny wheels in huge machineries they cannot control, people seem to want to break free and rebel in their various ways. They look for new identity with others, new belongings.
So it is simplistic and overly idealistic to think it can all be solved by calling for solidarity, for class action against the “one percent” and so, as the lines are actually blurred, the “one percent” is just a fraction of the problem, there are still others in between, who do never want to be part with the ones at the bottom, and want to separate themselves also.
Perhaps history tells us that revolutions only happen in certain situations and environments, and they never last long, although some bring profound changes.
So I would suggest to be realistic, about challenges and what goes on, the Brexit was an expression of many angers, by various groups, it was not a revolution, and neither that much of a reaction, as the vote was nearly only half against the other half (but having many shades on either side too). Nevertheless, it seems to have been a reaction against the establishment by a fair few, and to believe there would be eternal human progress seems to just be a dream, as reactions can happen in the opposite direction.
As humans we must learn to contain that “natural beast” in us that may bring out the dark side, as only reason and smart action will prevail.
until the labour party commit to concrete-moves to both end poverty and to attack that fact that the bottom 40% only have 3% of the nations’ wealth..
..this state of affairs conjured up/sustained by both the tories and labour..
..until labour do that they will remain useless auto-eroticists..
..let’s not forget how andrew little promised to axe the ‘radical’ policies of the ’14 campaign..(!).(.just what the feck they were i am not sure..)
..but his point was he promised to drag labour further right..
..so really…he needs to be rolled..
..so..who next..?..i know many on the left criticise jacinda ardern for her alignment with the right faction in labour..(those who hobbled cunnliffes’ campaign by starving it of meaningful policy..who can remember any of it..?..)
..but i think following the upcoming clinton/warren pairing..that she will be best placed..and i see her as having the intelligence to read the mood/the desire for real change..
..little…unless he has some revelation on the road to timaru – or something..is clearly not the man for the mood/time..
Thanks John for another good piece.
Voter turn out is low almost everywhere these days ( except for Brexit ) and both show how much folks do not believe in nor trust most puppet governments and understandably so.
Unrest and murdering journos and demonstrator leaders and murdering innocent people and mass economic chaos and dying refugees are just a tiny bit of the damage and sadness directly relating to this madness that is trying to dominate the world.
Most govts. are not to be trusted as they lie to the people and are by and for and about corporate greed and dictatorship and mostly not about serving the people who pay their salaries. Most govts. are mostly owned and dictated to by the Rothshchild’s nest of families / neo-nazi zionists / and the upper 1 % ers Bilderberg group of mostly bankers and corporate crooks. The people everywhere are sick and tired of their domination and it is changing fast. Watch the fear mongering from this lot of greedy crooks grow and grow. Question them always and their motives.
I am not anti-jewish at all but I am – anti – neo-nazi zionists.
This is not news, it has been in the making for a very long time.
The UN’s sustainable development and Agenda 2030 are real and being implemented more and more. The UN is not our friend and we need to get familiar with their plans regarding the New World Order that they and their banker buddies are all about.
http://www.naturalnews.com/051058_2030_Agenda_United_Nations_global_enslavement.html
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-03/2030-agenda-month-un-launches-blueprint-new-world-order-help-pope
Yes, and the left in NZ do the same with housing.
Western countries need immigration because of aging populations. Our housing problems are because of neoliberalism – commodification of housing, increased inequality, and no net increase in social housing since 1991. But we blame foreigners and immigration.
Bollocks we need immigration because of aging population. Theres just so much wrong in that statement. Take the number of jobs offshored and / or automated . No benefit for Joe Average in that and no jobs for immigrants either. Ergo no tax…and some fat cat offshores profits so no tax there either.
So we end up with pensioners plus local and immigrant beneficiaries fighting for less houses and healthcare. Plus depressed wages….Oh dear the Left is thinking again.
“Bollocks we need immigration because of aging population…
So we end up with pensioners plus local and immigrant beneficiaries fighting for less houses and healthcare”
Good luck building decent housing and having a healthcare system under capitalism without a working age population. Or are you proposing we end capitalism? The solution to our housing disaster is a state housing scheme and that requires workers and the well off to pay taxes. We’ve got a population bulge moving into retirement and they will be vulnerable – they need a taxpaying base of workers. Perhaps you don’t give a shit about old people? What are your plans for them?
“Take the number of jobs offshored and / or automated.”
In case you haven’t noticed, offshoring happened over the past 30 years. Our manufacturing has gone. Automation might be an issue in the future, but not over the next 10-20 years in NZ (if we are to be a knowledge economy – our last two govts say we are).
“Plus depressed wages”
Our poverty minimum wage is written into law and blaming immigrants won’t solve that. Minimum wage should be way higher than it is – the minimum wage and neoliberalism is our enemy, not our fellow workers. Redistribute the wealth more, because we all know the wealthy didn’t earn it.
“Oh dear the Left is thinking again”
What, you mean highlighting issues and proposing solutions? Does that bother you?
“Take the number of jobs offshored and / or automated”
Our jobs disappeared overseas during the 80s and 90s, thanks to right-wing economic theory. They’re gone.
As for automation, that is a pressing concern for countries with a manufacturing base (that’s gone). They call us a knowledge based economy don’t they? Perhaps we should start acting like one. Free tertiary education would be a start.
“So we end up with pensioners plus local and immigrant beneficiaries fighting for less houses and healthcare.”
Good luck building more housing and sustaining a public healthcare system without working-age people, and a population bulge moving into retirement.
How do you think we’ll sustain a health system without taxes from working aged people? We need a state housing scheme too, if we are serious about housing and health, then we need more immigrants, not less.
“Bollocks we need immigration because of aging population. Theres just so much wrong in that statement.”
Really? Why? You need to put up an argument. At least try.
How do you expect we ensure the wellbeing of the elderly over the next 20 years if there’s a shortage of working age people?
“Oh dear the Left is thinking again.”
Do you mean looking at issues and proposing solutions without blaming immigrants? Sorry if my critical thinking impacts on your bigotry project.
Boris is cool. After all his initials are BJ
Comments are closed.