The neo-liberal politics of hate…

The government’s economic, social and political schema alongside the inadequate political opposition (re Labour) for spelling out an alternative is a dangerous recipe for encouraging the growth of prejudice and hate.

Searchlight Educational Trust have only just produced a report on British attitudes regarding culture identity and race. Essentially, UKIP and the EDL are said to be adapting well to attracting individuals wanting to attach themselves to an extremist/racist politics of identity (the BNP aren’t).

The rise of the ‘individual’, or more the rising belief of the individual, is crucial. This, coupled alongside the rise of neo-liberal economic policies since the 1980s obviously plays a damaging complementary role. In turn, this diverts attention away from the social structural facets that influence extremist attitudes, such as inadequate welfare and prevailing levels of poverty.

But a mainstream political force against such a movement is lacking. Yes, parties such as the Greens combat these views as much as they can, but they are only slowly starting to get more media coverage.

The essential player here is the Labour party. If Miliband wants to counter-pose market structures within the NHS, if he wants to have an ethical foreign policy then we have to work with him to make him see that these are just failings of a larger systemic outlook the Labour party have adopted over the last decade or so, routed in market facilitation, profit and greed. They themselves encouraged (and still do) a politics of hate, an incessant fascination with the individual and a fear of the ‘outsider’ at the expense of social solidarity.

It is a worry that the BNP are said to possibly over take the LibDems in Barnsley. Yes, the LibDems are not expected to do well there anyway, but whilst Labour may be doing ok at the moment, the more Labour councils drive through the cuts, the more Ed Miliband repeats the ‘need’ for cuts and the more Labour continue to go down the path of reinforcing this idea there is no alternative, then the stronger extremist attitudes will get.

Whilst the politics of identity is governed by a narcissistic belief in the individual, this goes alongside an exclusionary policy of those not seen as meeting a specific individual regulatory ‘ideal’ – the same policy the government’s enact when dealing with groups that they perceive to be undermining their sacred work or family institutions:

There is a 50:50 split on the question of whether there is a ‘place for every kind of person in this country’ or ‘some people are just too different to fit in’ (see here for more findings)

This will not be helped with Cameron’s multiculturalism rubbish, again spreading fear and hate. Nor will it be helped by the government’s scapegoating economic policies. It breads a race to the top (and bottom – depending on how you look at it), and so shutting those seen as ‘inferior’ out of society is a way to keep one’s own base ‘safe’. Again, the government’s own ignorance to the social, economic and political effects of their egotistical economic illogicality spreads ignorance.

According to the report (note this link is to a Left Foot Forward analysis – that contains a link to the report, however), there are Identity Ambivalents and Cultural Integrationists, the former are more likely to be Labour and the latter Tory. Indeed, the report itself argues that both Cameron’s and Miliband’s approach is unlikely to challenge the former’s (especially) views, who are likely to hold such accounts because of their economic and social position – in fact, Cameron’s economic policies are cited as a problem. Whilst Ed Miliband has made some good rhetorical gestures of late, words are all they are so far.


54 thoughts on “The neo-liberal politics of hate…

  1. You will probably ignore this because it will make you ask a question you don’t want to answer.
    Does supporting a racially prejudiced immigration policy make you a racist?
    Open door to The European Union, while discriminating against the rest of the world has distorted the racial mix of this country.
    Labour and Condem still support this policy.
    Are the majority of this country racist or misinformed?

  2. Thanks for the comment.

    I am assuming you are against EU immigration? Well, personally, I am for an open border policy beyond EU so that would answer your question. How would you answer your own question if you are against EU immigration?

    Furthermore, don’t forget we already have outside EU immigration as well. Granted, however, this is being seriously restricted.

  3. Hi . Immigration is vital and desirable.
    I hope this makes answering the question easier.
    Which political party advocates an open borders policy?

  4. My understanding of the Green policy is that European Union countries should have no migration restrictions for non EU people. However it also says that migration should be agreed localy, and a wide range of restrictions could be applied. How does this give the UK open borders?
    Are we pretending my origional question has gone away?

  5. That’s fair enough. I have tried to find our views on non-EU migration so will keep looking. If you find anything let me know. I agree we should have open borders beyond EU, so would be happy to concede Green Party should look at this if they too don’t sign up to that as what I have read so far makes no mention of non-EU immigration.

    1. I personally think open borders will be bad for Britain in my and my childrens lifetimes.
      I hope that people who support open borders have a party to vote for, and I hope for you it turns out to be the Greens.
      Liblabcon view that “open borders are OK for EU,” whilst discriminating against the rest of the world is racist.
      People who claim to only support this because “it is a step in the right direction” are deluded and hypocritical.
      Controlled immigration is not racist, just sensible.
      UKIP are the largest non racist party in this country.
      Does this help with my origional question?

      1. see below for more information on the open borders, it appears i was right re our stance on non-eu immigration.

        I agree that we should look outside EU too.

        I am really confused with your argument now however. If you think it is vital and desirable to have immigration but that it needs control, then you basically support the existing system. As currently we have non-eu and eu immigration, both with control. So I actually don’t see your objection to the current system.

    1. It’s getting late, perhaps sleep on it.
      I am not trying to catch you out, I am asking a simple question.
      Open door to The European Union, while discriminating against the rest of the world has distorted the racial mix of this country.
      Liblabcon support this racist policy.
      Are the majority of voters in this country racist or misinformed?

      1. I wouldn’t say ‘distorted’ is the right word. We still have outside eu immigration. It needs addressing, but you are generalising when you say all liberal and labour and even some Tories would be against more non-eu immigration. Consider the problems the Tories are having with bringing in the immigration cap for non-eu immigration this year.

        It is one of those things that we need more public debate on. As I have shown, the Greens have a good policy, which basically would be an open border policy. But my confusion is that as you clearly support the UKIP line of reasoning, and want to pull out of Europe and put clear limitations upon immigration, that in itself is racist? Or do you not agree with that, and would you prefer open borders instead?

  6. My statement, my wording; Yes true? Or No lie? To continue.
    Labour PARTY policy is to support this prejudiced immigration policy. FACT
    Conservative and Lib Dem PARTY’S also support it. FACT
    The majority of voters are Liblabcon. FACT
    I can support open borders as an ideal. Until someone explains how to make it work, I will continue to lock my doors.
    Immigration should be non racist, non sectarian prioritising asylum and humanitarian needs. Immigration needs control both to encourage and limit numbers.
    Controlling immigration and racism are two separate issues.
    You deserve to be confused; it can’t be easy to accept that Liblabcon can be proved to be racist. That’s what you get if you accuse UKIP of racism.
    Are the majority of voters in this country racist or misinformed?
    My car insurance is going down, it’s just not fair!

    1. What i disagree with is your assumption that these leadership policies are indicative of the mass membership as a whole.

      You have no coherence to your arguments. You can’t say that restricting immigration for non-eu is racist, but then want control on immigration still. Utter contradiction.

      I am in the Greens, I accept that a lot of the main parties policies are crap. But, UKIP are racist. You are just good at hiding it.

      Misinformed, if I had to choose one.

  7. • I clearly DON’T “ASSUME that these leadership policies are indicative of the mass membership as a whole.”
    • I demonstrate that the policies discriminate racially against non EU.
    • Original question again; Are the majority of voters in this country racist or misinformed?
    • You have eventually chosen misinformed.
    • Are you under the impression that the Greens propose no restrictions on immigration?
    • Until we have global government, restrictions are necessary. You need to re-read your manifesto.
    • You see a contradiction because you accept control by the EU, while I want immigration controlled by a democratically elected British Government.
    • UKIP have had racist members in the past. We no longer tolerate them. Ex BNP are now banned from joining. Our manifesto clearly states, non racist, non sectarian. Anyone expressing racist views at a meeting from branch level up is immediately asked to leave. You may eventually agree “if you had to choose” that you are misinformed, but not by me and not by non racist UKIP.

    1. So, how would immigration control go under a UKIP system then?

      Oh, that’s right. A five year freeze. Clearly, that’s not racist, non-discriminatory to non-EU and EU citizens alike?!

      You have to realise that times have changed. The sole sovereign state has lost it’s influence. If you want a global government, as you state, you are clearly going the wrong way about it calling for us to abandon Europe.

      I am in no illusion of the need to reform Europe, but you wont do it through screaming from the sidelines. European/global action is important for many things these days, it is more likely practically impossible to withdraw anyway and if you want to go back to the day of the 50s-onwards where we realised what idiots we were for not being in Europe, you are clearly mistaken about the importance of European cooperation.

  8. Please clarify your position on UK immigration.
    Please clarify The Greens position if different.
    The EU is step towards Global Government, history agrees with you

  9. Do you wish to continue trying to prove your claim that UKIP are racist, or is your silence admission that your accusation is an ignorant childish rant.

  10. Firstly, I have not been silent on purpose, I have a busy life and am not always available to reply to comments straight away.

    I think you have ignored my point re UKIP 5 year freeze anyway. How do you square that without being racist.

    I don’t believe that we can pull out of Europe, we need Europe. However, I do believe it needs radical reform and only within Europe can we do that. Non-Eu immigration needs reform, as presently it is used to discriminate and is only being tightened. But as UKIP want to freeze immigration i can’t see how you can oppose the tightening.

  11. Please clarify your position on UK immigration.
    If as I suspect you propose open borders without world government, please explain whose laws apply and where, where and to whom one pays tax, how you would hold an election, who funds social services, I could go on, but there are hundreds of people living in this bedsit, and they all want a go on the interweb.

    Answer this question and I will happily explain how immigration restrictions can be non racist.

    It will then be a pleasure to explain UKIP policy.

    Please accept my appologies, and take your time. I am sure you would not like to be accused of racism.

    1. I like the idea of a world government, hence why I don’t think we should pull out of Europe! So, don’t jump to conclusions before knowing the answer. I believe in better local democracy in the UK, but the old Green motto “think globally, act locally”.

      And no problem, would not want you to think i was deliberately being ignorant.

      It’s not the same racism as the BNP, it’s more a xenophobic attitude.

  12. No is not green policy.
    Do you wish to discuss party politics or personal?
    You have already (eventually) answered my question.
    You agree that the majority of voters are misled by their parties into supporting a racist immigration policy.
    I now wish you to justify your accusation of racism.
    As my own views support and go beyond UKIP, please state wether this accusation is against me personally, or just UKIP.
    You may wish for the benefit of people reading this to state Green policy on UK immigration restrictions.

    1. I thought we had established that the Green Party are for non discriminatory immigration? Go back up to see the part I quoted re non-Eu discrimination. You do have the tendency to just repeat the question until you get the answer you want.

  13. You propose open borders without world government, please explain whose laws apply and where, where and to whom one pays tax, how you would hold an election, who funds social services.
    Don’t address your glib reply to me; tell us how unrestricted immigration applies to someone who doesn’t want to pay tax or vote and works for cash. A drug and child trafficker, international banker or arms trader.

    1. Again, you ignore my above comments where i SUPPORT a world government. So all your other rubbish about not wanting to pay tax is nonsense. If you read my blog, I regularly call for changes to tax laws, for instance. Please read what I say without making unfounded assumptions.

  14. I say that open borders are not possible before we have world government. If we cannot agree on this, further argument is pointless.

    1. I would say that they are in specific countries, but then I take the point that logistics and practicality may cause problems.

    1. How many times. I AGREE with a World Government. You choose to ignore to try and create conflicts that don’t exist.

    1. I would say we need to make it as non-restrictive as possible, but that you wont be able to coordinate open borders to their full potential without better international coordination aka. world governance.

  15. And so who have you mapped out to exclude from the UK? Have a list of the characteristics that people would have to met?

  16. As I am not xenophobic I would not show preference to Europeans and discriminate against non Europeans.
    You would.
    I don’t know if you are xenophobic, but you are demonstrably racist.

    1. I don’t know how many times I have to repeat to you, but I don’t find the practices regarding non-eu immigration commendable either. But you know, this debate is circular as you choose to take your own line from whatever I say.

  17. What you find commendable is irrelevant.
    The FACT is that the UK immigration policy is racist; you support it so you are racist.
    Supporting a racist policy is racism in any shape of debate.
    Your racist actions are caused by your support for the EU. You will justify them by pretending that the British people would accept rule by the undemocratic EU without a vote. You will say the Greens are for a referendum, again irrelevant to your racist actions, because you personally support EU membership.
    I am fed up with racists like you criticising UKIP, and then franticly checking manifesto’s when they are challenged. UKIP’S reason for existing is to get Britain back to its own elected government, trading with Europe, but for the purpose of this discussion not subject to their rules on immigration.
    While you are adjusting your reason for existing to justify your racist actions, I suggest you put forward a credible argument for staying in the EU. Try economics, and explain the benefits of bailing out Portugal. Try justice and the difference between Habeas corpus and Corpus Juris. Try freedom and actually read our constitution, The Lisbon Treaty.

    1. I am actually finding this actually rather infuriating. You are ignoring everything I am saying. How many times do I have to say that I find the current immigration policies wrong? You are just not listening.

      We have had a vote on Europe and it was accepted. There is so much I dislike about Europe, actually if you look around my blog I have been criticising the economics of Europe and why I am against the Euro. How many times i have to say that Europe needs serious reform I don’t know.

  18. Actions count, not words.
    Support EU membership and stay a racist.
    You can’t change the EU, it’s not democratic.

  19. Again; You will probably ignore this because it will make you ask a question you don’t want to answer.
    Does supporting a racially prejudiced immigration policy make you a racist?
    Open door to The European Union, while discriminating against the rest of the world has distorted the racial mix of this country.
    Labour and Condem still support this policy.
    Are the majority of this country racist or misinformed?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s