Equality Does not and Can not Exist

Globalists have a phrase which they use to silence all who object to the abolition of nations, cultures and societies - the phrase is a nonsense phrase: Equality and Diversity.

Neo-Marxists and their liberal partners-in-crime are the very worst for trotting out this phrase, which is quite ironic considering that neither Karl Marx himself nor any of the people around him believed in Equality.  Take, for example, the slogan:

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

The phrase much used by Karl Marx, was coined by the French theoretician, Louis Blanc, in 1839.  As is typical of Marxists, the phrase has been co-opted to the point of theft.  Louis Blanc coined the phrase to emphasise that in a Socialist society, the selfishness and 'dog eat dog' mentality which is the central motive force of Capitalism, will be replaced by a spirit of hospitality, generosity and cooperation.

The very notion of differing abilities and differing needs, underlines the fact that we are not equal, in the sense of being the same, but that each of us has something unique to offer, and also that each of us is in need of the support of our fellows for individual reasons.

The obsession with Equality by liberals and 'Marxists' does not stop at the level of individuals.  The belief that there is no such thing as race is a part of this obsession.  The modern Marxist-Communitarian-liberal nexus denies that there is any difference between people at any level, thus nations must be abolished.  This is NOT Socialist thought.

Those who push the Equality dogma are servants of Capitalism who knowingly or not, are destroying the natural basis of society, in order to usher in a Global authority under which the common people are serfs and the Ruling Class has global power over all of us.  This absolute despotism and tyranny may use the words of anti-Capitalism, but it is nothing more than pure Capitalism behind a mask.

The following quotes succinctly deal with the nonsense of the Equality devotees.  They are the words of the great ideologists, Mikhail Bakunin and Jack Haldane (and are reproduced here with thanks to Celtiberian of the Socialist Phalanx Forum)



"The dogma of human equality is no part of Communism . . . the formula of Communism: 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs', would be nonsense, if abilities were equal."
—J. B. S. Haldane

"Nationality. . . is a historic, local fact which, like all real and harmless facts, has the right to claim general acceptance. . . Every people, like every person, is involuntarily that which it is and therefore has a right to be itself. . . Nationality is not a principle; it is a legitimate fact, just as individuality is. Every nationality, great or small, has the incontestable right to be itself, to live according to its own nature. This right is simply the corollary of the general principle of freedom."
—Mikhail Bakunin

Immigration:The reserve army of capital

A timely repost of an article describing the situation in France, but which applies to all countries suffering under Capitalism.

 

Immigration:The reserve army of capital

by TheocWulf

 "Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same." - Alain de Benoist, Immigration: The Reserve Army of Capital

In 1973, shortly before his death, the French President Georges Pompidou admitted to have opened the floodgates of immigration, at a request of a number of big businessmen, such as Francis Bouygues, who was eager to take advantage of docile and cheap labor devoid of class consciousness and of any tradition of social struggle. This move was meant to exert downward pressure on the wages of French workers, reduce their protesting zeal, and in addition, break up the unity of the labor movement. Big bosses, he said, “always want more.”

Forty years later nothing has changed. At a time when no political party would dare to ask for further acceleration of the pace of immigration, only big employers seem to be in favor of it — simply because it is in their interest. The only difference is that the affected economic sectors are now more numerous, going beyond the industrial sector and the hotel and catering service sector — now to include once “protected” professions, such as engineers and computer scientists.

France, as we know, starting with the 19th century, massively reached out to foreign immigrants. The immigrating population was already 800,000 in 1876, only to reach 1.2 million in 1911. French industry was the prime center of attraction for Italian and Belgian immigrants, followed by Polish, Spanish and Portuguese immigrants. “Such immigration, unskilled and non-unionized, allowed employers to evade increasing requirements pertaining to the labor law” (François-Laurent Balssa, « Un choix salarial pour les grandes entreprises » Le Spectacle du monde, Octobre, 2010).

In 1924, at the initiative of the Committee for Coalmining and big farmers from the Northeast of France, a “general agency for immigration” (Société générale d’immigration) was founded. It opened up employment bureaus in Europe, which operated as suction pumps. In 1931 there were 2.7 million foreigners in France, that is, 6.6 % of the total population. At that time France displayed the highest level of immigration in the world (515 persons on 100,000 inhabitants). “This was a handy way for a large number of big employers to exert downward pressure on wages. … From then on capitalism entered the competition of the workforce by reaching out to the reserve armies of wage earners.”

In the aftermath of World War II, immigrants began to arrive more and more frequently from Maghreb countries; first from Algeria, then from Morocco. Trucks chartered by large companies (especially in the automobile and construction industry) came by the hundreds to recruit immigrants on the spot. From 1962 to 1974, nearly two million additional immigrants arrived to France of whom 550,000 were recruited by the National Immigration Service (ONI), a state-run agency, yet controlled under the table by big business.

Since then, the wave has continued to grow. François-Laurent Balssa notes that:

when a workforce shortage in one sector occurs, out of the two possible choices one must either raise the salary, or one must reach out to foreign labor. Usually it was the latter option that was favored by the National Council of French Employers (CNPF) and as of 1998 by its successor, the Movement of Enterprises (MEDEF). That choice, which bears witness of the desire for short-term benefits, delayed advancement of production tools and industrial innovation. During the same period, however, as the example of Japan demonstrates, the rejection of foreign immigration and favoring of the domestic workforce enabled Japan to achieve its technological revolution, well ahead of most of its Western competitors.

Big Business and the Left; A Holy Alliance

At the beginning, immigration was a phenomenon linked to big business. It still continues to be that way. Those who clamor for always more immigration are big companies. This immigration is in accordance with the very spirit of capitalism, which aims at the erasure of borders (« laissez faire, laissez passer »). “While obeying the logic of social dumping, Balssa continues, a “low cost” labor market has thus been created with the “undocumented” and the “low-skilled,” functioning as stopgap “jack of all trades.” Thus, big business has reached its hand to the far-left, the former aiming at dismantling of the welfare state, considered to be too costly, the latter killing off the nation-state considered to be too archaic.” This is the reason why the French Communist Part (PCF) and the French Trade Union (CGT) (which have radically changed since then) had, until 1981, battled against the liberal principle of open borders, in the name of the defense of the working class interests.

For once a well-inspired Catholic liberal-conservative Philippe Nemo, only confirms these observations:
In Europe there are people in charge of the economy who dream about bringing to Europe cheap labor. Firstly, to do jobs for which the local workforce is in short supply; secondly, to exert considerable downward pressure on the wages of other workers in Europe. These lobbies, which possess all necessary means to be listened to either by their governments or by the Commission in Brussels, are, generally speaking, both in favor of immigration and Europe’s enlargement — which would considerably facilitate labor migrations. They are right from their point of view — a view of a purely economic logic [...] The problem, however, is that one cannot reason about this matter in economic terms only, given that the inflow of the extra-Europe population has also severe sociological consequences. If these capitalists pay little attention to this problem, it is perhaps because they enjoy, by and large, economic benefits from immigration without however themselves suffering from its social setbacks. With the money earned by their companies, whose profitability is ensured in this manner, they can reside in handsome neighborhoods, leaving their less fortunate compatriots to cope on their own with alien population in poor suburban areas. (Philippe Nemo, Le Temps d’y penser, 2010)

According to official figures, immigrants living in regular households account for 5 million people, which was 8% of the French population in 2008. Children of immigrants, who are direct descendants of one or two immigrants, represent 6.5 million people, which is 11% of the population. The number of illegals is estimated to be between 300,000 to 550,000. (Expulsion of illegal immigrants cost 232 million Euros annually, i.e., 12,000 euro per case). For his part, Jean-Paul Gourevitch, estimates the population of foreign origin living in France in 2009 at 7.7 people million (out of which 3.4 million are from the Maghreb and 2.4 million from sub-Saharan Africa), that is, 12.2% of the metropolitan population. In 2006, the immigrating population accounted for 17% of births in France.

France is today experiencing migrant settlements, which is a direct consequence of the family reunification policy. However, more than ever before immigrants represent the reserve army of capital.

In this sense it is amazing to observe how the networks on behalf of the “undocumented,” run by the far-left (which seems to have discovered in immigrants its “substitute proletariat”) serve the interests of big business. Criminal networks, smugglers of people and goods, big business, “human rights” activists, and under- the-table employers — all of them, by virtue of the global free market, have become cheerleaders for the abolition of frontiers.

For example, it is a revealing fact that Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri in their books Empire and Multitude endorse “world citizenship ” when they call for the removal of borders, which must have as a first goal in developed countries the accelerated settlement of the masses of low-wage Third World workers. The fact that most migrants today owe their displacement to outsourcing, brought about by the endless logic of the global market, and that their displacement is precisely something capitalism strives for in order to fit everybody into the market, and finally, that each territorial attachment could be a part of human motivations — does not bother these two authors at all. On the contrary, they note with satisfaction that “capital itself requires increased mobility of labor as well as continuous migration across national borders.” The world market should constitute, from their point of view, a natural framework for “world citizenship.” The market “requires a smooth space of uncoded and deterritorialized flux,” destined to serve the interests of the “masses”, because “mobility carries a price tag of capital, which means the enhanced desire for liberty.”

The trouble with such an apology of human displacement, seen as a first condition of “liberating nomadism,” is that it relies on a completely unreal outlook of the specific situation of migrants and displaced people. As Jacques Guigou and Jacques Wajnsztejn write, “Hardt and Negri delude themselves with the capacity of the immigration flows, thought to be a source for new opportunities for capital valuation, as well as the basis for opportunity enhancement for the masses. Yet, migrations signify nothing else but a process of universal competition, whereas migrating has no more emancipating value than staying at home. A “nomadic” person is no more inclined to criticism or to revolt than a sedentary person.” (L’évanescence de la valeur. Une présentation critique du groupe Krisis, 2004).

“As long as people keep abandoning their families, adds Robert Kurz, and look for work elsewhere, even at the risk of their own lives — only to be ultimately shredded by the treadmill of capitalism — they will be less the heralds of emancipation and more the self-congratulatory agents of the postmodern West. In fact, they only represent its miserable version.” (Robert Kurz, « L’Empire et ses théoriciens », 2003).

Whoever criticizes capitalism, while approving immigration, whose working class is its first victim, had better shut up. Whoever criticizes immigration, while remaining silent about capitalism, should do the same.

_________________
Take notice, That England is not a Free People, till the Poor that have no Land, have a free allowance to dig and labour the Commons, and so live as Comfortably as the Landlords that live in their Inclosures. For the People have not laid out their Monies, and shed their Bloud, that their Landlords, the Norman power, should still have its liberty and freedom to rule in Tyranny.-Gerrard Winstanley & 14 others TheTrue Levellers Standard Advanced - April, 1649

An answer to the speculation about the SWPE

There has been much speculation over the past view days as to the nature of the SWPE.  As links have been posted on various sites which will lead those who are debating the purpose of the SWPE to here, the answers to the various allegations follow.

• Is the SWPE a joke, set up to annoy Marxists?

No!  The Socialist Workers' Party of England is a genuine Socialist organisation.  The party has been in existence in its current form for a short while, but dates back to 1988 when the British Socialist Party was formed.  The SWPE combined the BSP with the Free Workers' League, which was formed in 1993.  The FWL was very active in the 1990s and 2000s, with its own publication, the Workers' Voice.  Stagnation and a drop-off in activism in both the FWL and the BSP led to the merger into the SWPE.

• The SWPE has been active this year with the NF.  Why would a Socialist organisation rub shoulders with Nationalists?

The SWPE does not believe in the false divisions which pit Nationalist against Socialist.  We are not Marxists.  We fully understand that the Nation is the People and that the People is the Nation.  We stand alongside everyone who rejects Globalism, whether in its Capitalist or Communist form.

• The SWPE has been called Beefsteak Nationalist - Brown on the outside, Red on the inside.  Is this true?

This accusation is due to our support for the excellent Socialist Phalanx forum, which is a forum for Left Wing Nationalists and Revolutionary Socialists.  The SWPE is not Brown on the outside and Red on the inside, we are Red right through!  Those who wish to gain an understanding of what real Socialism and Left Wing Nationalism is all about, should visit Socialist Phalanx from the links tab above.

• Is the SWPE 'applied Strasserism'?

This is an intriguing question.  Certainly we have a great deal of respect for Gregor and Otto Strasser.  We have much respect for many non-Globalist Socialists from other countries.  Our main inspiration remains with the great thinkers who have come from within the English nation.  We are the Socialist Workers' Party of ENGLAND and although we do look beyond our shores to those who fight against the Global scourge, we are firmly rooted in our own land.  Socialism is about what is best for the people.  It has to be focused upon our own people and cannot be a caricature of other lands.

• The SWPE is courting disillusioned Marxists at the same time as standing with left-leaning elements in the National Front.  Is this true?

This is true.  We are more than happy to welcome into the fold those who have been seduced by Marxism, but who have woken up to the falsehood of Globalism.  We are also very keen to work with anti-Reactionaries who reject the right wing aspect of Nationalism (Monarchy, Capitalism, Stock Market economics, Imperialism etc).

We hope this clears up some of the questions being debated online and we thank those who have come here as a result of this debate for taking the time to do so.

Demonstration for the Protection of Children

Yesterday (Saturday 10th May 2014), a highly successful demonstration was held in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, to highlight the horrendous crime of the sexual exploitation of children.  The mainstream media prefers the euphemism 'grooming'; the correct term is rape.

The demonstration attracted several hundred local Newcastle folk, with no-one at all speaking out in opposition.  The event at the Greys Monument, saw the unusual spectacle of the National Front occupying the east side of the monument, the Communist Party the west, with the SWPE taking up position on the north! 

The National Front must have had over 200 members in attendance, with key figures speaking against the vile abuse of children, especially the cultural acceptance of this outrage by newcomers to the country.  Although the Communist Party was not there to demonstrate against the anti-paedophiles, the second of the two speakers (speaking to a small group which may have broken into double figures, but probably didn't), took the time to speak about how controls on immigration are 'racist' and harmful to the Working Class!  This proved (if any proof was necessary) that the Communists are nothing but Capitalists using the rhetoric of Socialism.  According to the Communist, we must have open borders, and presumably tolerance of all 'cultures' including those which seek to rape our children, as well as their own.

The SWPE position of 'grooming' (child rape) is very straight forward.  It is an outrage which is injurious to society as a whole.  It is a sickening symptom of a society which has lost its way and embraced hedonism, materialism, and individualism; a society which has become cut off from Natural Socialism.  Whether it is the likes of Establishment-controlled scum like Jimmy Savile, Edward Heath, Cyril Smith, the Labour Party-sponsored PIE, or immigrants who have paedophilia enshrined in their ridiculous religions, the SWPE is emphatically opposed to the practice and would see the end of such practices as a priority in a Socialist England. 

There are people who are confused as to why the SWPE chose to stand away from the Communist Party.  The answer to this question is very simple.  We are Socialists.  We stand for the protection and advancement of our society; our people.  The Communists - by embracing globalism - have taken onboard an ethos which runs against the interests of the people.  Communism and Capitalism are two sides of the same coin.  They both seek an end to border controls and limits on the free movement of goods and people.  They both have no respect for culture, people, tradition, sovereignty, and all which makes us distinct from any other part of the world. 

The Communists may feel that they are fighting for the people, but by eroding that which protects the Workers from exploitation, they are doing the work of the Capitalist enemy.  The Communist obsession with unrestricted immigration cannot but have the result of destroying the protection of the Workers from unemployment and wage slavery.  When this obsession reaches the lunacy of feeling that it is 'racist' to wish to protect our children from immigrants who are culturally and religiously predisposed to paedophilia, this goes beyond treason to the Workers, to treason to the people as a whole, and children in particular. 

The SWPE is Socialist. Socialism is the political expression of love of our own people.  The SWPE understands that immigration is a result of exploitation.  To this end, we would see all non-European immigration halted and reversed, with generous financial incentives provided to the countries of the non-Europeans to relocate their own people.  Capitalism has created the madness of mass migration for economic gain.  Only the implementation of full Socialism, with the restoration of every aspect of society and every inch of land to our own people, will see an end to the cancer of Capitalism.  Communism is Capitalism with different clothes, but for all the well-sounding slogans, it is still the work of the enemy.

The SWPE would like to thank the organisers of the anti-paedophile demonstration (the National Front) for so warmly welcoming our participation in this important event.  We would also like to commend the Northumbria Police for their low key operation, which made the event pleasant for everyone.