Voters don’t want your pity

Labour treats working-class voters with pity instead of respect.

Joanna Williams
Share
Topics Brexit Politics UK

‘Think of the most vulnerable person you know and vote in their best interests.’ This meme, apparently started by musician and Corbyn fanboy Martyn Ware, was all over social media in the run-up to last week’s General Election. It was a sentiment shared by Glastonbury founder Michael Eavis, who urged people to use their vote to ‘protect the most vulnerable’. Also, comedian turned censor-in-chief Steve Coogan took to the airwaves demanding people vote tactically against a government that ‘is utilising ignorance and prejudice against the most vulnerable people in society.’

Meanwhile, the New European (surely in its death throes now?) urged young people to vote tactically for Remain parties other than Labour – not only on behalf of the Remain cause, but also for ‘the vulnerable’. ‘We have to decide whether ideological purity is worth defeat’, mused writer Lucy Holland. ‘Or, to put it another way, whether inflicting another five years of Conservative rule on the most vulnerable in our society is worth being able to say “at least I voted Labour”.’

There is something nauseating about those with access to a media platform urging people to vote on behalf of the vulnerable. It reduces voting to an act of charity. Engaging in democracy is presented as akin to bunging a few quid to a homeless person. Worse, public declarations of voting for the vulnerable risked turning the election into a massive act of virtue-signalling. It has allowed some – mainly high-profile, wealthy individuals – to present themselves as morally superior. Unlike the rest of us, they wouldn’t be thinking of their own interests when casting a vote.

What an insult to the legacy of all those who fought to secure universal suffrage. From those who died in the Peterloo Massacre to the Suffragettes, disenfranchised people did not struggle for the vote in order to demonstrate their compassion. The exact opposite was the case. They wanted their own interests and the interests of their friends, family, community – the interests of their class – to be represented in parliament. They wanted their collective voice to be heard through the ballot box in order to have a say in shaping the future of society.

As we have seen since the UK voted to leave the EU, some wealthy individuals, celebrities and high-profile journalists have been able to influence the national conversation through the courts or the media. These people are now free to boast about selflessly voting on behalf of the most vulnerable. Meanwhile, for everyone else, putting a mark on a piece of paper once every few years is the only way we can have our own interests represented. This is not selfishness, it’s politics. It’s why the vote is important.

Once, Labour claimed to represent the working class. Now that the working class has resoundingly rejected Labour, the party is busy recasting itself as the party of the vulnerable. Rejected MPs and disappointed Corbynites have been deflecting from self-analysis with the ‘pity the vulnerable’ narrative.

Sadiq Khan got the ball rolling on Facebook: ‘We have fundamentally failed those that most desperately need the help of a Labour government. They include the sick, the poorest and the vulnerable.’ Yvette Cooper joined in on Twitter: ‘Families with kids who are going hungry really needed a strong Labour Party and Labour government.’ Richard Leonard, leader of Scottish Labour, was also on-message: ‘Thursday’s election result was devastating, most of all for the most vulnerable in our society who face the prospect of another five years of Tory rule.’

The election result showed that Labour was rejected in working-class areas where people most strongly backed leaving the EU. The ‘pity the vulnerable’ message allows Labour MPs to justify trying everything in their power to overturn what their constituents voted for back in 2016. They are telling themselves and each other: our job was never to represent the working class, it was to protect the most vulnerable. Voters, meanwhile – especially the C2s category (or ‘skilled manual workers’) who were more likely to back the Conservatives than any other social group – find themselves either written off as selfish, uncaring and possibly even racist and xenophobic. Or they are reclassified as part of this amorphic ‘vulnerable’ blob.

Opposition to the newly elected Conservative government is now shaping into hysterical posturing about what a heartless and uncaring society we have become. The Archbishop of Canterbury has voiced his concern over ‘the direction’ of the country, arguing that ‘the situation for vulnerable people’ has become worse. Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland argues that the election result is a repudiation of Corbynism and ‘it’s the poor and vulnerable who will pay the price.’ One young Labour campaigner, quoted in the Guardian, claims that ‘knowing the devastating impact this government will have on the most vulnerable in our society is what pushes young activists like us.’ Meanwhile, donations to food banks and charities helping ‘the UK’s most vulnerable’ are said to have surged after last week’s election result.

Of course, all of this begs a question: if things are really so bad, if so many in the UK are teetering on the edge of survival and Labour is their only hope, why didn’t the party win a landslide?

Perhaps it is because working-class people don’t want to be labelled as ‘vulnerable’ and are insulted by offers of protection. Perhaps it is because elite pity can so quickly switch to loathing and contempt when the very same working-class people being pitied deign to express a political opinion. Or perhaps it is because people want political agency, not charity.

One thing is for sure, until Labour’s champions and celebrity hangers-on stop patronising voters and start respecting them, they are unlikely to be re-elected any time soon.

Joanna Williams is associate editor at spiked. She is the director of the new think tank, Cieo. Find out more about it here.

Picture by: Getty

To enquire about republishing spiked’s content, a right to reply or to request a correction, please contact the managing editor, Viv Regan.

Comments

K Tojo

17th December 2019 at 11:55 pm

Is Novara Media the house journal of Momentum?

michael savell

17th December 2019 at 11:50 pm

Today the subject is all about how fptp is wrong and why the system should be changed.How Boris
will get brexiteers who have lost their seats into the house of lords thus ensuring that members will not be financially vulnerable and cut the workload on himself.There is absolutely nothing being done about changing a system which works for only a very small % of people,the top 5% will sit on their illicit gains,there will still be zombie conglomerations who live on credit which will have to be paid back by the public,there will still be tax havens and companies who pay next to nothing in tax,there are banks going skint which will have to be bailed out because they are too big to fail and there are those in the media who earn fortunes and still consider they have the right
to decide what is best for the guy living under the bridge and we have those living on the hog moaning about somebody who earns a £5 more than them.Most of the charities started off by ordinary people collecting voluntarily until the luvvies took over,now the volunteers hand their cash to AI, what does it do,where does it go,who knows who cares.Boris Johnson is said to be the new Blair according to Hitchens,the parties have swapped places so what is the point of arguing policies?

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 7:10 pm

Why do the Tories believe that they have made massive inroads in the North when they have only won a handful of seats? The vast majority of the (urban) north is still red as is the whole of South Wales, despite the mess of the last few years. Some traditional Northern Labour voters voted Tory because of Corbyn’s incompetence and extremism but even that wasn’t enough to convince most northern Labourites to make a pact with the devil.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 8:32 pm

Fact remains that seats have gone to the Tories which I never thought would ever do so. Many have been Labour more or less for ever….generation upon generation. And that has turned, sometimes often not just a marginal gain but a thumping one.
Now you may want to put this back in the box and try to talk as thought it isn’t such a big deal, really. But it is and denial won’t make it otherwise. It may, on the other hand, mean that it will be more likely to happen again….

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 8:46 pm

I’m not Labour and certainly not pro-Corbyn. With the possible exception of the SNP none of the parties offer the radical change that I support. Nevertheless, I have a particular problem with Tory Mammon-worship.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 7:03 pm

Interesting how Tories assume that all opposition to Toryism is Labourist socialism. Gladstonian liberalism, social utopianism and Christian socialism are all powerful alternatives to Tory asset-stripping and state-endorsed corporate theft.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:39 pm

I suggest that patronising ‘the poor’ is a hell of a lot better than systematically destroying the social fabric of and economic opportunity within deprived areas by years of austerity, which has been Tory policy for a decade now. After Thatcher and austerity, the last thing these people need is some smug, patrician Home Counties liar telling them they have their best interests at heart.

Korina Wood

17th December 2019 at 4:31 pm

Social Fabric, that is a new one. People want to be better off and they saw that the Labour Fascists did not want to listed to their Voters. Labour always knows best for their Voters, but the Voters are fed up not being listened to. But what does Labour care, they are doubling down on their Voters and giving them yet another Left Wing Incompetent Leader.

TrappedInTheOffSide .

18th December 2019 at 10:43 am

Would like to point out that labor has never had the chance to listen to voters as it’s not been in power since the 70’s you cannot count new labor it was Tory In all but name

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 5:57 pm

A casual observer would think, judging by your comment, that nothing had happened between Thatcher and Austerity. Whereas, as history tells us, there was a labour government under Tony Blair from 97 to 2007, followed by a labour government under Brown until 2010. That’s 13 years of labour altogether.
Forgive me, but what you appear to be saying is that Labour, once in power, achieve pretty much nothing to actually change the status quo, Indeed they are so forgetable and make so little impact, according to your recollection, that it begs the question ‘why bother’? A question the electorate appears to be answering by not doing so.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:33 pm

This article conveniently ignores the fact that the vast majority of working class people still voted Labour. The Tories only won a few additional seats in the North East and the whole of South Wales remains resolutely Labour. The Tories will soon lose their gains in Blyth, Redcar, etc. if they fail to deliver. For most of those new Tory voters, their vote would have been an act of desperation and protest, not a willing endorsement of the opportunist Johnson.

The decimation of the North was a clear result of Thatcherite policies. During Thatcher’s reign, a conscious decision was made to punish Labour-voting areas and embark on a massive programme of political and economic centralisation which has created the northern economic wasteland we see today. The Tories have no interest in reviving areas outside the South East.

Gerard Barry

17th December 2019 at 4:33 pm

“The decimation of the North was a clear result of Thatcherite policies. During Thatcher’s reign, a conscious decision was made to punish Labour-voting areas and embark on a massive programme of political and economic centralisation which has created the northern economic wasteland we see today. The Tories have no interest in reviving areas outside the South East.”

I always think it’s odd that Thatcher is still being blamed for the economic problems of the north of England. I really don’t mean to be cheeky but are the people there really not capable of doing anything but mining or manufacturing? Isn’t there free education up to and including A-Levels for everyone in the UK so that young people don’t necessarily have to do the same type of work their parents and grandparents did?

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 6:57 pm

Very difficult to get on in the South East if you have a County Durham accent, didn’t go to a ‘public’ school and/or Oxbridge and can’t actually afford to move there because of the significantly higher cost of living.

Do you really think that the people of Durham are to blame for the fact that no one invests in their region when this is one of the most socially stratified and economically/politically centralised countries in Europe. Make Stoke on Trent the capital of England and abolish the fee-paying schools and then we might start liberating the potential of the millions left behind.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 8:53 pm

But Zenobia….Labour will never abolish fee-paying schools. Its where they send their own kids.they had ample chance to do it and didn’t.
They had no problem getting rid of grammar schools though because they knew they were a chance for ordinary working class people, through merit, to get ahead. You can always count on Labour to encourage the people who can’t and won’t get on to pull anyone who wants to climb up the ladder down a rung or two.

Ross Herron

17th December 2019 at 11:52 pm

I live in Newcastle and it is definitely not a ‘northern economic wasteland’ its a thriving vibrant City. As are most Northern cities.

My dad voted Tory for the first time in his life last week. He’s 68 and he’s worked in heavy industry all of his life. His dad was a minor and his brothers were all miners. My dad told me that he couldn’t trust Corbyn on national security and did not trust him with the economy. He also vote Brexit and wanted his vote honoured.

The truth is Labour do not represent working class any more. They represent the very poorest in our society and the middle class intellectuals elites. They have no chance of ever getting back into power with this approach. My prediction is we will have a Tory government in this country for a very long time.

jan mozelewski

18th December 2019 at 2:11 pm

Zenobia, bless, doesn’t get out much and still recites the stereotypes of yore. She also thinks that the discord between the ‘metropolitan elite’ and people in provincial towns and cities is confined to England. Which is, of course, drivel. It is a discord and frustration which is common throughout the EU. Because it is what the EU itself has created.

Charles Stuart

18th December 2019 at 2:25 am

I often wonder what the Thatcher government was supposed to do to keep the inefficient and non-profit making industries in the midlands and north viale, so that the workers had a job. For too many years governments had propped up these industries with subsidies which made them more inefficient. But according to people like you, the government was just supposed to just keep using the hard earned money of th ose in the more affluent and adaptive areas of the country to run industrial theme parks up north.
The left is responsilbe for many silly ideas, but one of the silliest is the idea that businesses exist merely to hire staff and pay wages. Buisnesses exist to make profits for their owners. Wages are just a cost of doing business.

Ven Oods

17th December 2019 at 3:01 pm

Things are so bad here that people just across the Channel are prepared to risk drowning and worse to set foot in Blighty.
Anyway, as it turns out, most of the ‘vulnerable people’ we know used to be Labour (and LibDem) MPs.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:43 pm

Poverty is both relative and absolute. Your comment is simplistic. There is suffering here and in every developed country. The UK has the greatest wealth inequality in the western world after the US and many ordinary Brits, including thise in employment, struggle to make ends meet.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 6:05 pm

Tosh. I live in France, a country that has embraced Socialism ever since the revolution. It doesn’t work, of course. It doesn’t do much of anything other than keep the working people all pegged under a glass ceiling. There is massive inequality here…despite the national motto….and that is always the case with socialism. Somehow it doesn’t seem to stop Government ministers having millionaire lifestyles and owning chateaux. It certainly doesn’t ensure the rich pay their taxes. What it does do is suppress the upwardly mobile skilled worker and lower middle classes.
There are plenty of foodbanks in france (they were invented here) and plenty of homelessness. Lots of people cannot afford medicare (it is not free at point of delivery and one needs top-up insurance for some things) and hence the Gilet Jaunes.
If anything inequality increases under socialism, it certainly doesn’t decline.

Ellen Whitaker

17th December 2019 at 2:52 pm

Shouldn’t the Labour Party now change its name, to better represent it’s principles (Marxist Woke), its membership (middle-class liberal left) and the people it “represents” (the vulnerable, many of whom, for one reason or another, may not work)? To keep calliing themselves the Labour Party at this point strikes me as ridiculous.

Ven Oods

17th December 2019 at 3:12 pm

You must admit that the ‘Marxist Woke Middle-Class Liberal Left and Vulnerable Party’ doesn’t exactly trip off the tongue?

Claire D

18th December 2019 at 6:15 am

That gave me a laugh at 6am.

L Strange

17th December 2019 at 8:18 pm

It’s like the misnomer that is the Socialist Workers Party. They’re not actually a political party and have never stood for any kind of election, and hardly any members are workers in the traditional sense. They are mostly students and/or middle class.

Mark Houghton

17th December 2019 at 2:29 pm

‘Vulnerable’ is one of those great weasel words along with ‘marginalised’, racist, etc – it can mean whatever the person wants it to mean. I think in this respect ‘vulnerable’ means ‘too stupid to vote the correct way’.

Tim Wheeler

17th December 2019 at 12:50 pm

A mad, bizarre, & and unusual socialist viewpoint:
The most powerful and effective thing a weak and vulnerable person can own is their VOTE (which has exactly the same value as that of Thornberry, Starmer, Benn, and a FTSE 100 Chief Exec.) Let the E.U. control U.K. policies instead of elected M.P.s and you rob the poor and vulnerable of the ONLY power they have! That’s what both wings of Labour and the CBI and Banks are all about.

Neil McCaughan

17th December 2019 at 12:36 pm

As Cherie Blair wrote so movingly at the time when the nation voted to leave the EU

“Who are these fucking people? Do they never stop and think about the effect on London house prices? Selfish, selfish bastards. And where is Sunderland anyway? God, I hate old people”

Ven Oods

17th December 2019 at 3:08 pm

Hilarious, Neil. Any chance you could upload a copy of that recording? I’d integrate it into my ‘Scratch and Speak’ brand of Xmas cards.

Iain Litenment

17th December 2019 at 11:56 am

The Labour party is dead. It’s not resting or stunned, it’s dead. The only reason it stays on it’s perch is that it has been nailed there.

Female Penis

17th December 2019 at 11:10 am

We should keep reminding slebs that they effectively asked us to *hold our nose about anti-semitism, because the ideologue is going to redistribute the wealth*
Ask them when and where we’ve heard that before.
The idea that current Tories are far right is beyond bullshoot, it is wilful lying, if they wanna go nassi hunting seems pretty obvious where their natural home in UK politics is.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 4:00 pm

The Brexit Party.

Puddy Cat

17th December 2019 at 10:57 am

Pepys writes about the apprentices being mown down by the militia in London in the seventeenth century way before the appearance of workers parties, Watt Tyler before them. Peterloo, iconic to socialism is perhaps nothing more than more indulgent times when people are paid to report. Britain missed 1848 and the upheavals on the Continent and maintained the monarchy.

We are the sum of our differences without the overriding burden of republican zeal, the contrivance of the state and its maintenance being above the individual.

Jonathon Meades maintained that liberals want us to be like them and want us to be grateful to them. At root we have identity politics and the casting of the many in the light of chosen examples of those for whom there is little or no provenance. In the act of discriminating we are people who admire best practise and taste but will not take sides between those of whom we have no knowledge cardboard cutouts selected as being representative of a class, a race or a creed.

So much of what has been put before us masquerades as universal while being solitary. The Parliamentary system has a mammoth task trying to codify its statutes. That it occasionally gets things wrong is not so odd. When an MP stands in Parliament to voice some individual case, a special pleading, they are actually wasting time, time when they should be introducing a bill or amendment in support of their case. To rise in Parliament with the intent of naming a specific case when they are but yards away from the organs that manage such affairs is grandstanding. A sort of medieval representation where the king is asked to pass judgement. It is an idiocy to approach a Prime Minister to effect an exception and only serves to reinforce the sentiment in this article.

We rely on scrutiny of laws and we rely on the exact implementation of what is adjudged to be the aims and principals. If our laws fail in this respect then we are at the mercy of those that seek advantage, those that play the system and can find a living in it. In this regard we are well served by a Party that has suggested a change in the composition of the Civil Service. One that can focus on the well being of those that work against those that carp.

The thrust of Labour’s last campaign was that Britain is a Third World country and that want, here, is a turgid and inhumane manifestation. This is a slight against those in the real Third World who are dying to sample our sort of ‘poverty’. If we are to be a pragmatic and benevolent society (benevolence, giving, is such an admirable thing that can bring self-respect to the individual’s existence). We do do not want to be the world’s fifth or sixth richest country in the world we want to be the third or fourth richest in order to feed our ambition of a happy and content society that finds its own company admirable.

B Fullerton

17th December 2019 at 9:43 am

The enemy of quality is equality.
Should the criteria for employment selection be suitability /qualification or your immutable characteristics.

Gerard Barry

17th December 2019 at 10:26 am

“Should the criteria for employment selection be suitability /qualification or your immutable characteristics.”

Unfortunmately, a growing number of employers seem to think the latter is now more important. “Diversity” seems to be a sort of new religion in many businesses, including the international law firm that I work for.

John Millson

17th December 2019 at 9:19 am

Wow. Let’s snuff out all signs of altruism, solidarity and ‘common decency’, shall we? What a cold & miserable prospect. Everyone sticks to his or her ‘class’ and we can all get on as we used to, with mutual suspicion and passive hostility, eh?
People should vote how they want to but given the history and roots of the two main parties, it would be extremely odd if the Conservative Party turned into the genuine party of equality of opportunity and improvement for all.
For the Conservative Party it is all about political expediency.
It is great more people can help themselves and progress. However, unless we have a total overhaul of this country’s establishments, only a minority will benefit fully. Understandably, this minority want to hold on to what they have. This means making sure others get no where near their positions and possessions. The Conservatives are good at promoting this friction.
Historically the Conservative Party has been one of the ferocious protectors of this minority, the other being the Whigs/Liberals.
The Conservatives invariably revert to type and function.

Gerard Barry

17th December 2019 at 9:38 am

Many people who vote Labour also do so for selfish reasons, so don’t pretend that voting Labour means people are morally superior to everyone else. If people from the social welfare class and ethnic minorities can vote en masse for labour in order to protect their interests (and their interests alone), why shouldn’t working and middle class vote Conservative?

John Koenig

17th December 2019 at 9:50 am

You’re wrong because everyone has to live with everyone else and they’re not going to vote deliberately to trash the country. The average Tory voter does occasionally leave their mansion without the chauffeur to go down to the shops or to the local pub. They’re not going to vote for conditions that mean they’re stepping over the homeless and being mugged as they do so. Tories are in favour of ‘altruism’ even if, ultimately you could interpret is as being for the same reason as people vote Labour: self-interest. In the case of Labour voters it may be that they want to signal their virtue or assuage their guilt at having inherited a great civilisation from their ancestors.

Tory voters are also in favour of freedom of all kinds, of not sending death threats to political opponents, of not throwing gay people off tall buildings and that kind of thing. They vote accordingly.

John Millson

17th December 2019 at 10:27 am

John Koenig,
Of course there are thoroughly selfless altrusitic Conservative MPs just as there are grasping careerist Labour MPs. And yes if the means justify the ends, how can we complain, really? ( I would love to see an end of the food-bank phenomenom and widespread begging.) But, it is interesting that 40 years ago we had a similar ‘revolution’ and I don’t think we could conclude that that era was marked by social harmony.
I voted Labour not with any sense of moral superiority. I campaigned and voted for Labour because, despite the Momentum monstrosity, our local MP is a normal, hardworking effective representative. Yes, I would have been troubled had Corbyn got in – but it was always unlikely.

Jim Lawrie

17th December 2019 at 10:19 am

Nowhere does the author talk about snuffing out anything. I look forward to Ms Williams’ articles. Your imputations show you are too timid to voice your real objections. But they come out in the rest of your post. “People should vote how they want to but … ” That sums up your post and is precisely what Ms Williams is writing about.

Is it possible for you to consider that working class people see control of their own destiny via Political representation and recall as a step toward snuffing out insecurity and poverty? That they can think for themselves and want to translate that into working for themselves and theirs?
Should working class people be “allowed” to decide where to send their children if given education vouchers instead of the no choice system of now?
It is probably unfair of me to ask you about working class people since you make no mention of them in your post. But the article is about them.

John Millson

17th December 2019 at 3:23 pm

Jim Lawrie,
Your post provokes in a good way.
(My background is middle class. My Dad was a Tory activist. Yes, I even voted Tory once.)
I hope this new Tory government can help people transform their lives just as a reformed Opposition will be ready carry on when the Tories run out of steam. Maybe progress is being made – with no repetition of 1979…
Labour should be a ‘natural party of government’ too.

John Koenig

17th December 2019 at 3:33 pm

@John Millson. Could it be that, really, “We’ve never had it so good?”. Inequality exists, but is inequality itself important? Some people are poor but look forward to their work every day; some people are rich but feel suicidal. Some people are born beautiful and some ugly; some weak, some strong etc. Some people live in oil-rich Venezuela and look with envy at the life we have here in the UK.

If we literally got rid of homelessness and begging, what would it take to do that? Would true equality be a good thing? I think at the moment we have the freedom to be unequal. Only by curtailing freedom can we have equality – whatever that means. Momentum/Labour would be prepared to curtail our freedom for an experiment that would be doomed to failure.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:59 pm

Well said, John Millson. I fear the good people of Sedgefield and Bishop Auckland are in for a nasty surprise when the Tory party inevitably reverts to type.

John Koenig

17th December 2019 at 5:09 pm

You’re doing exactly what the article says: assuming that they don’t know what they’re voting for; they’re ignorant, stupid, victims. That they, in fact, don’t actually know what the Tory Party is; nor what the Labour Party is – they must be doubly stupid. But maybe, just maybe, they know exactly what the Labour Party has become a front for, and are far less stupid than you think. You may not be as wise as you think, either.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 6:51 pm

interesting.
Every single remoaner I have ever heard burbling on about Brexit and how bad it is….for the young, for the ‘vulnerable’, for minorities and even for the planet….Every Single One….has been united by one thing. And No, it isn’t altruism towards their fellow man. it is self interest. Their business interests in the EU, their second home in the EU and not wanting to pay exorbitant Capital Gains , the value of their cosy pension pot if the you-know hits the fan and we crash out. (they’d have to cut down on the booze order and meals out).

Philip Humphrey

17th December 2019 at 8:05 am

Labour’s problem with the traditional working class have been building up for a long time. Mrs. Thatcher was elected partially on the votes of a proportion of working class people and she held her majority with their help. In the Blair era Labour used a policy of uncontrolled mass immigration to create what they hoped would be a new working class more to their liking. Unfortunately for them, immigrants have ambitions and aspirations and tend to go native in wanting the same things as the people already there. The article is entirely right that the working classes of whatever colour or creed do not want pity or handouts from urban middle class Lady Bountifuls in the form of the Labour party, nor do they want the control of their lives that goes with it.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:51 pm

There was mass opposition to Thatcher throughout the North, Scotland and Wales. A few petits bourgeois voted Thatcher for nationalistic or chauvinistic reasons but the vast majority of the workers were anti-Thatcherites, and rightly so since the friend of that murderer Pinochet was no friend of ordinary working mennand women.

jan mozelewski

18th December 2019 at 2:19 pm

Oh Zip it Zen. Maggie got thumping majorities. That was down to many people in the working class voting for her. My dad was one. Worked in a boiler suit all his life. Was sick to the back teeth of car workers/ dockers/ miners being called on strike by red nut-job shop stewards and causing everyone else grief and inconvenience and power-cuts etc etc. He was glad to be rid of labour and put an end to being governed by Union bosses having beer and sandwiches at No 10. To hear lefties now…often those not born when Thatcher was in office….you’d think no-one but a few toffs voted for her.

NEIL DATSON

17th December 2019 at 7:28 am

Unhappily, ‘the poor are always with us’, but it is surely much easier and cheaper (and profile raising, which is so important to these people) for ‘slebs’ to lecture their fellow men on who to vote for than to get seriously involved in charity work.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:57 pm

Some of them do get ‘seriously involved’ in charity work. In any case, how many non-celebs get ‘seriously involved’ in charity work? I doubt you yourself are ‘seriously involved’ in charity work, or that you ever will be.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 8:46 pm

Are you falling into the trap of assuming ‘charity’ and therefore charity work is, ipso facto a good thing? There is plenty of evidence to suggest it is anything but.
Often it makes no appreciable difference to anything material other than robbing the poor of their pride and independence.
For decades the British people have contributed to every charity imaginable….going back to Blue Peter Christmas charity drives where the young are ‘educated’ to think it is unquestionably a good thing to do. Yet in many ways its a totally SELFISH thing to do; more about the feel-good factor it brings to the giver rather than anything it does for the beneficiary.
Every year the same story…..so clearly it doesn’t work. Worse, it can enable those who are responsible for the problems, usually because of corruption and croneyism, to carry on because the charity hides the symptoms at least for a while.
Charity is, and always was, patronising, meddlesome and dishonest. It appeals to people’s guilt.

NEIL DATSON

19th December 2019 at 7:23 am

Reply to Jan. There are sundry different charities. While some of them can become ‘make work’ rackets, many aren’t. I don’t think that the RNLI has even once created a storm at sea.

Dominic Straiton

17th December 2019 at 7:15 am

Until labour abandon the poison of “diversity, equality, inclusivity ” and go back to “work, family, community” they wont get anywhere. They wont.

Jonstone Smith

17th December 2019 at 5:54 am

‘Think of the most vulnerable person you know and vote in their best interests.’

What a trite, completely vapid sentiment to express. Borne of narcissism, wrapped in faux virtue and seasoned with condescension. The implicit subtext is vote Labour. This despite the quite reasonable assertion that to vote Labour would be a vote against the idea of honouring the democratic will of the people. To vote Labour would be to support no limits on immigration, increasing the burden on public services already straining to maintain acceptable standards. To vote Labour would mean surging uncompromisingly towards a socialist dystopia where identitarian, intersectional, cultural Marxists enact their totalitarian fantasies. To vote Labour would mean restrictions on freedom of speech, no doubt actively encouraged contrition for the supposed ‘sins’ of our fathers perhaps even forced reparations, more equality of diversity rather than equality of opportunity, the individual earmarked dependent on his social justice score, increasing crime rates and a general atmosphere of anti Jewish sentiment for good measure etc etc.

Thankfully British people channeled the spirit of their forefathers, principle was prioritised over tribe, red turned to blue. Vulnerable people can be glad they live in a country where the electorate had the gumption to see through Labour lies and false promises,

In doing so the contempt the Islington set possess and conitnue to reserve for the indigenous working class of this country has rightfully come back to bite them – on their delusional disingenuous Marxist arses.

Perspective is everything, but by demonstrably not casting a vote for Labour, it is a reasonable and prescient contention that one has indeed looked after the interests of societies most vulnerable.

Jane 70

17th December 2019 at 4:46 am

Strange that our Jewish communities were not included within the ‘vulnerable’ umbrella by our leftward superiors .

Years of unofficially nodded through anti-Semitism eventually leading to the investigation by the EHRC and the Chief Rabbi’s unprecedented intervention before the election.

Vulnerability obviously is not as all inclusive as the latest show of hand wringing would have us believe.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 6:16 pm

Equally telling that our Woke celebrities don’t point out the most vulnerable group of all…the elderly. They are too busy wishing them dead.

K Tojo

17th December 2019 at 2:24 am

“The most vulnerable in society” function as a kind of mascot for the activist Left allowing them to claim ownership of the moral high ground and to contrast their caring / sharing philosophy with that of the selfish capitalists. Newer and more vulnerable groups must be identified regularly as the Left strives to indulge its yearning for the narcissistic pleasures of moral outrage.

Dominic Straiton

17th December 2019 at 7:17 am

The same people in the 19th century went to save souls in Africa.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:53 pm

You seriously believe that C19 evangelical missionaries were motivated more by socialism than spiritual concerns?

Michael Lynch

17th December 2019 at 1:44 am

Forget their deluded rhetoric, do not pay the slightest attention to it. They have been viciously wounded and will only be able to, at best, manage a loud whimper in the HOC over the next five years. After all, that’s the only battle ground that really matters. In fact, prepare yourself for the greatest show on earth. They are already turning on each other and it’s going to get worse, a lot worse. They will literally tear what’s left of the Party asunder until nothing is left except bare bones.

Jim Lawrie

17th December 2019 at 12:40 pm

Their latest deflection on the election is that it should not have taken place.

Gentrifiers I know in London are secretly delighted because they think property prices will rise and they’ll be able to escape the multi-culti areas they colonised over the last decade.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:52 pm

You need to get out more, Jim. There’s more to the world than your small village in Scotland.

M Blando

17th December 2019 at 6:17 pm

Pardon Zen? If Jim doesn’t get out of his village in Scotland, how come he knows folks in London and their secrets? A characteristic of the left appears to be blindness to what’s right in front of them. You’ve illustrated it perfectly.

Danny Rees

17th December 2019 at 12:43 am

Too right.

All those working class people down the food banks need to know that the Tories don’t pity them they respect them.

John Koenig

17th December 2019 at 6:12 am

Under Marxist Labour the whole country would eventually become a food bank, with daily queues for everyone not favoured by the party. But at least we would all be equal.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 7:14 pm

The Tories are already pushing the UK that way. They see excellent growth potential in the food bank sector.

Danny Rees

17th December 2019 at 11:02 pm

Which policies who have lead to this then?

NEIL DATSON

17th December 2019 at 7:21 am

Danny, I have no direct knowledge of Food Banks but I’ve told told (by somebody I believe ought to know, and who has no axe to grind) that one of the reasons that their use rose swiftly after the 2010 election was that Job Centres were allowed to refer people to them. Previously, under the Labour Government, the strict instruction had been NOT to give such ‘non-statutory’ help to the most needy, because what mattered most was hiding their difficulties from the public gaze. I really don’t know whether that is true, but I wouldn’t be in the least surprised. Labour has long considered virtue signalling more important than virtue.

Michael Lynch

17th December 2019 at 9:04 am

Your last sentence says it all. Excellent analysis.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:44 pm

And what the hell have the Tories done to stimulate economic growth in those areas over the last decade? Sweet FA.

James Knight

17th December 2019 at 1:47 pm

Many already figured out that the Tories respected them more than Labour or Lib Dems who choose to disrespect what they voted for. That’s why we saw ex miners voting Tory and Labour got their arses kicked.

Corbyn thought he could gloss over the greatest betrayal of democracy in UK political history with trinkets like free broadband. Gifts to “grateful subjects” do not deliver self respect. Wales received lots of money from the the UK recycled via through the EU over the years, but they still voted Leave.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 3:47 pm

The Tories ‘respect’ them so much they wish to keep them in their lowly status. After all, we must keep the oiks in their place!

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 6:10 pm

Nope that’s Labour. It does diddly squat to really change people’s lives. After all that would be like a charity like Oxfam actually solving anything. They make themselves redundant. The Labour party are dedicated to keeping people dependent on hand-outs. Just like the town and city mayors in socialist France like to keep lots of otherwise unemployed people on minimum wage ‘jobs’ (I once saw 15 men and two lorries refixing a man-hole cover) in order to buy votes. The last thing they want is a vibrant properly working economy.

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 6:12 pm

Foodbanks are an invention of Socialist France.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 6:57 pm

But neoliberal England appears to have adopted them with great enthusiasm!

NEIL DATSON

19th December 2019 at 7:17 am

Jan, according to Wikipedia the world’s first food bank was founded in Phoenix, Arizona in 1967. They are surely a ‘good thing’ if they help needy people in difficulties over those difficulties, but a ‘bad thing’ if they allow the thriftless the freedom to fritter money on idle luxuries.

Jane 70

17th December 2019 at 12:23 am

Vulnerable, shmulnerable!

The great unwashed, the stubbornly irredeemable plebs,have told the elite to take their righteous sensibilities and stick them where the sun doesn’t shine.

We have demonstrated autonomy at the ballot box, and this is unacceptable!

Thus, we have now acquired another moral failing to add to the list; a callous disregard for the ‘vulnerable’.

Earth to left: stop with the moralising, the outrage, the patronising ‘we know best’ thinly disguised snobbery.

Linda Payne

17th December 2019 at 5:57 pm

To be viewed as weak and vulnerable is totally disempowering and annoying. Who would want to be seen in that way? God how I loathe the middle class left, they act like a gaggle of interfering Christians without the religion

jan mozelewski

17th December 2019 at 6:52 pm

Lol. Absolutely spot on.

ZENOBIA PALMYRA

17th December 2019 at 7:12 pm

If we had more Protestant evangelical Christianity in this country it would be a significantly safer and more pleasant place to live in. England has been mostly Christian since at least the seventh century and our continued peace and wellbeing depend on it remaining so.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to comment. Log in or Register now.