Sign Up

Please sign up to be able to read, comment and contribute to our website.

Log In

The Left versus The Workers

One of the things that are surprisingly obvious to anyone who understand politics is that what passes for left wing in the West has very little concern or even liking for the working class.

Not only that, but they are actively working against the interests of said working class, and are openly favouring the interests of the welfare recipients over the workers.

Why is that?

Like with everything else pertaining to the modern Left, we actually go back to Marx.

Lumpenproletariat is a term that was originally coined by Karl Marx to describe the layer of theworking class that is unlikely ever to achieve class consciousness and is therefore lost to socially useful production, of no use to the revolutionary struggle, and perhaps even an impediment to the realization of a classless society.[1] The word is derived from the German word Lumpenproletarier, Lumpen literally meaning miscreant as well as rag. The Marxist Internet Archive writes that [lumpenproletariat] identifies the class of outcast, degenerated and submerged elements that make up a section of the population of industrial centers which include beggars, prostitutes, gangsters, racketeers, swindlers, petty criminals, tramps, chronic unemployed or unemployables, persons who have been cast out by industry, and all sorts of declassed, degraded or degenerated elements.

Now what do these people sound like? Well, they sound like the mass of people that are very unlikely to ever hold a job. The people who, nowadays, mainly live on welfare and who contribute little to nothing to the society.

However these people have something of value, and a place in society. They vote, and they will always vote with the people who will continue to give them welfare.

This is not a new concept. Here’s Marx talking about how it was used 150 years ago:

“In the Eighteenth Brumaire, Marx rhetorically describes the lumpenproletariat as a class fraction that constituted the political power base for Louis Bonaparte of France in 1848. In this sense, Marx argued that Bonaparte was able to place himself above the two main classes, the proletariat and bourgeoisie, by resorting to the lumpenproletariat as an apparently independent base of power, while in fact advancing the material interests of the finance aristocracy

Does this sound familiar? Because this is what the fascists have done to take power in Italy, and what the modern Left are doing today.


According to Marx, the lumpenproletariat had no special motive for participating in revolution, and might in fact have an interest in preserving the current class structure, because the members of the lumpenproletariat usually depend on the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy for their day-to-day existence. In that sense, Marx saw the lumpenproletariat as a counter-revolutionary force.
Leon Trotsky elaborated this view, perceiving the lumpenproletariat as especially vulnerable to reactionary thought. In his collection of essaysFascism: What it is and how to fight it, he describes Benito Mussolini's capture of power: Through the fascist agency, capitalism sets in motion the masses of the crazed petty bourgeoisie and the bands of declassed and demoralized lumpenproletariatt, all the countless human beings whom finance capital itself has brought to desperation and frenzy&.

The working class has this thing where it wants to work, and it has become smarter and smarter. The working class has figured out, with the help of the media etc that the much praised socialism is in fact a bad thing, and that they live better in a functional market economy.

Like I have written before, this became very obvious in Britain in the 80s and 90s. After the humongous Labour fuckup in the late 70s that saw power cuts, 3 day weeks and the dead not being buried because of strikes, the working class welcomed the order of Thatcherism with open arms.

While some of her measures aimed to cut down the power of the Unions were severe, overall the working class realised that their work did actually pay. The smart idea to allow them to buy their council homes not only gave the workers their own place, it gave them a sense of self esteem.
They were no longer the dregs, they were respectable members of the society, and this is why Tony Blair had to move Labour significantly to the right to win in 97.

Unfortunately, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair’s worst mistake, was quite eager to despoil the workers of their fairly new wealth by plundering their pension pots and selling the country’s gold.

But that is for another post.

The point I am trying to make here is that the Western Left doesn’t care about the workers. Why?

Because when the workers do better, they move right. They are also simple, coarse and not willing to obey the dictates of well to do middle class revolutionaries who, like Orwell noticed long ago, were very eager to advocate for the workers from a top to bottom position but would never adopt working class manners.
The Left has always been dominated by middle class ideologues whose obvious point was that the stupid workers needed their middle class betters to lead them into the glorious revolution. For those who have forgotten, Marx married a noblewoman, and when he failed in his business ventures was generously subsidized by his rich friend Engels.

Lenin himself was from a well to do Middle Class family, Trotsky was the son of a rich farmer, and the list goes on. These ideologues didn’t per se care about the workers as much as they regarded them as inferiors, a manoeuver mass to be used for the bulk of the struggle after which the ideologues, their betters, will take power and steer the grateful masses.
Well, the masses have gotten smarter, and having seen how all socialist states crumble into dictatorship and violence and famine, the workers are rejecting the snotty middle class revolutionaries who may ride bicycles like Jeremy Corbyn, but at night go home to their 6 figure priced houses in nice neighbourhood.
So, what’s there to do? Simple, replace the workers with the people who will never do well enough to go right.
In the USA this was done with the Black minority. It goes back to the 70s, and it was an incredibly perverted process in that women would not get welfare if they lived with their husbands.

The result of this is that many family units, especially the black ones, broke down.The father moved out to allow the mother to receive welfare, and in the 80s the black family had already broken down enough so that women didn’t even think they NEEDED husbands anymore, since having babies would grant them welfare checks.

This is the basic demographic of the US Democrats. Basically they trapped an entire community on benefits which are very hard to get off from, since the moment you try to improve your life and work you lose your benefits and that causes a gap that puts many people off of even trying to find jobs.
Add to that the constant dimming down and destruction of state schools and the result is that the poorest of the poor are trapped and will never recover, and have to keep on voting the people who give them benefits.

However, even the Black community had wizened up to this and has been getting out of the morass. Statistically speaking there are more middle class blacks in America than there are poor.

So in their hurry to find another group to cast as the lowest class that should be dependent on benefits to survive, the Democrats used immigration.

The Western European Left, who had the same conundrum since the 80s, used the same trick- import brown people that can only do the most menial jobs and trap them on welfare, then watch them become citizens and continue to vote for you.

Of course, immigration hurts the working class. Most of the immigrants from the third world have little in way of marketable skills and it’s easy to settle them in the cities, get them addicted to welfare then watch the votes coming in.
Yes the cities will suffer and become giant slums, but none of the socialist politicians lives in those areas so who cares? The politicians don’t live there and the middle class activists live in nice areas as well.
So we ended up with poverty enclaves in the middle of great cities, dens of poverty and crime and corruption that always vote for the Left because they need the welfare.
Here’s some interesting stuff about the Tower Hamlets borough of London, one of the most “diverse” and poor areas of London

Almost half (49%) of children in Tower Hamlets are in poverty, the highest rate in London. It also has the fourth highest proportion of children in working families receiving tax credits (39%). Tower Hamlets had the second highest unemployment rate across London boroughs in 2014, at 8.8%

How does Tower Hamlets vote? Solidly Labour so why in God's name would Labout want to cut immigration?

Meanwhile the workers keep working and struggling, but the influx of immigration that killed and/or devalued the no-skilled or semi-skilled blue collar jobs they used to do.
Their wages are worth less, and the Left is more than willing to tax them more to pay for their imported voters.
So basically everywhere in the First World, immigration is used by the left to fleece the working class into paying for the lumpen proletariat that keeps them in power.
The Left doesn’t care about jobs. They want the workers to do bad because the worse off they are the more likely they are to fall into the welfare trap.

Jeremy Corbyn will be against Hinkley Point C for his “ethical concerns about nuclear power”, but in truth he is a well to do old man who made millions off the taxpayer and never had a real job in his life, and the addition of 20,000 well paid job to the country not only means nothing to him, but it is literally against his interests because workers who do well start thinking of themselves as middle class, start having aspirations and therefore STOP VOTING LABOUR.

Hillary Clinton welcomed NAFTA for the same reason. It's the reason the Democrats welcome illegal immigration- it drives prices down and it only screws the working class up.

It was very telling to see a bunch of Black democrat voters harass the Black Trump Voter here

This man is the future of his people.
This is the lumpen proletariat versus the workers. This is what it looks like, and this is why Donald Trump is going to win.
The Left doesn’t like workers. It has constantly acted against their best interests for decades.
The Left hates the workers. They “Cling to guns and religion” are “racists”, not to mention the now famous “basket of deplorables”. They despise the workers, whom they regard as cashcows for their electorate.

Please log in to comment

Back to All Posts

If you enjoy our work, please share it on your medium of choice.
While we are a free site and make no money from traffic, more visitors mean a larger the number of people who get to see an alternative view.
Thank you

If you enjoy our work, please leave us a comment. Registration is free, and we will not censor you. WE want to create a community of intelligent people who care about the fate of the world, where we can discuss without fear of social media censorship.