top of page

Odd bed fellows :social democracy and nationalism?

Stephen Hornsby-Smith

And I thought the UK's problems with immigration was not of social democracies making!?! Perhaps we are used to the pride and even boastful nature of the benevolence and philanthropic origins of Social Democracies favourite headbirth - the welfare state,but the recent constitutional issues in the UK have overshadowed such land of milk and honey. It seems to me that the late swing towards Brexit in the national referendum was based upon a section of Labour urban white working class voters who changed the result.... and I thought the UK's problems with immigration was not of a traditionally loyal band of socialist and social democracy voters?! I guess 'me first because I was here first' was too simplistic for these tabloid voters. Perhaps we are used to the pride. Yet an alarming sub text has raised its ugly head that illustrates the traditional views of the welfare state are more under threat than ever. But, here's the point, it is under threat by its traditional allies. Where else do you get " Who has the biggest NHS in Britain" willy waggling! Instead of an independence debate we have embarked on a demographic screw-up alligned with self-interest of welfare for us only policy. Is it only me who can see the sunrise? Or does this argument refer to 'only jobs for whites' or send 'em home back where they come from' or benefits for us(whether we deserve them or not) but no help for those 'johny foreigners' who become refugees from Syria, for example, exiles and illegal aliens without any support from the welfare state. And here's the new problem,the demographic that voted Brexit are largely those who wanted to shout and demonstrate against the invasion of Iraq but are not willing to take on the welfare consequences of the very policy they demonstrated their 'solidarity 'with the victims of the region. all mouth and no trousers? Did it cost too much too alleviate the sufferring of refugees, or did war in Iraq cost too much, or is EU immigration cost too much, or is NHS useage by EU 'health tourists' cost too much? Remember this is the section of the Labour movement that demands greater equality, unless they have to pay an equal share of it? Am I being a bit harsh or am I speaking from all sides of the electorate that we won't take any lessons on fairness from there side of the fence! 'Me first' mentality is often wrongly attributed or at least disputed from Tories accused of it, but at least they don't parade their badge of 'honour' in sending home the EU from our shores based on 'welfare greed'! These 'heavy- hearted protestors' have been outed as manipulating envoy senders to the UN knowing that cynically that respected 'Talking shop' would not burden the West with financial problems - to think that the global refugee crisis has become side lined because it's too expensive during an era of credit crunch 'realities?! You know although I'm a Tory I almost feel sorry for Labour to have to please this minority section of the Labour Party who did not vote for a better Britain Brexit but who voted negatively for someone to put on ice the NHS in all its universal support in Britain, but who want to regress Britain back to when 'white working-class people were the most oppressed by the Toffs rather than admit to bigotry towards immigrants per se! It must be quite a surprise to wake up and not have the best gripe in town! Perhaps they have become so entrenched in being the victim that they resent the losing of that status!? The broad Left who wore this policy as a badge of honour are now the 'we can't afford it' brigade because the 'Eastern EU countries have bled our NHS reserves dry' as medical tourists. Here's a question: were these Hypocrits actually saying the UK couldn't afford to spend money on defense per se by means of the Trojan Horse of Nuclear Disarmament when they actually wanted to spend more on Britain's welfare system? Was even the much maligned Blair using PFI so as not to spend the Treasury's dosh because he was intimidated by Chancellor Brown's 'need for welfare greed' ? What does today's Welfare state mean but an excuse to save ourselves first but not to extend the philanthropy to anyone else? Welcome to the crap shoot of 'silent Labour.' Welcome to dependency on Britain from within ,where dependency from outside of Britain is just a minor series of economic and political challenges that is hiding the real play of new demographics and new skill sets to enhance Britain, to make Britain more than ever by attacking the rights of those who are most vulnerable by placing them in direct competition with those who are also most vulnerable, but are refugees from the middle-east. How can those who thought they were protecting the middle-east from Western invasion then turn on 'immigrants' from the middle-east and vote Brexit? I have more in common with those who were wary of what Brexit would do to the City and what the EU would do to the City if Brexit had lost the referendum, than Left thinking 'heavy-hearted protestor types' who have been outed and caught with their true colours down. 'Me firsters' now want a re-match to do touchy feeley again. But with lies you can only go forward but you can never go back!


Why do I need to intervene in a debate for the Left only? Because somethings happened to the 'intervention' principle that has turned ideology on its head. Whilst 'Lehman Brothers was not dug out of its financial hole by the US Treasury and consequently died, their was adivergence in the 'force'; you could spend Taxpayers money to save Banks in Britain but subsidy or even bailling out doesn't mean that nationalization has taken place. The British Taxpayer stumped up the cash to save key publically used Banks, but they did not own them as public ownership ideology demands. Brown just wanted to use Nationalisation policies to take the credit himself politically as the anti-dote to New Labour and Blair, but all he did was to re- work PFI, made into a loan and with the future the private banking sector alligned to the fortunes of a supposedly Brown led government. Politically this intervention was about ditching Blair's Britain for Brown's, but public ownership of the 1945 government was never on the agenda, and Brown must have been eagerly relishing the sale of the banks back to private ownership so he could create a new form of dual ownership (the treasury and the private sector) and have a lot of money to spend on Christmas presents to the nation.Brown's interventionism was about undermining all the original burden of Clause 4, and creating something that did not rely on Blair's opposing it. This was Brown's legacy - a rejection of Labour's fixation with public ownership and an adoption of how to spend taxation on the private sector in the 21st century. This executive advance in post-nationalization was championed by the 'welfarist staters' because it contrasted with the way the NHS was perceived and offered a new bench mark to ring fence (or put on ice) the historical running of this British institution - why as a Tory do I whole-heartedly agree with the NHS? Because it was and remains the true recognition and dispensation to the British war spirit that pulled people together in times of rationiong etc in the post war era that was a becon to all of the Communist bloc countries behind the 'Cold Wall' that we weren't 'Capitalist pigs' but caring people who liberated itself without any vulgarity or extremism by the very Capitalism that breaks down class barriers as well as respects our values, and has the opportunity to renew its British independence retaining its friendships and keeping intact all that we celebrate with our European allies. I would have preferred the Brexit vote to have been a cleaner contest, and actually voted for the 'Remain ' campaign, but as someone once said..' apart from telling people that they have been motivated by hypocritical lack of logic...What can you do except talk to the wall until you go blue in the face?

Doesn't Brown just personify the old demographic in power becoming something he would have hated in anyone else from Labour and becoming a new entity run by demographics that enable you to change received perceptions that might even render someone a true Labour egalitarian but also a true socialist turned at the same time into a selfish egocentric self-deceiver who hides his or her resentment of those who have done better than they have, including immigrants, refugees and those who have excelled under the gaze of white Labour resentment- this is the time when this demographic are claiming 'foul' because some one has been at the races and made good in Britain in a way that they haven't.

Decide, do you want to demand equality when you resent black or brown faced success stories as much as those who 'bear a grudge' Britain? It is not an anomaly that interventionism has been Voted for by Britons, but who actually are the 'remainers' but an unfortunate section of the population that don't want to remain in the EU, but want to remain free of any social and demographic transformation that Brexit will and has already brought to Britain. I voted to remain in the EU, but was torn by the possibility of a new chapter with Brexit. Today I now know once more why I'm not a Labour man, because I believe Labour is shifty and capable of burying the bad news of corruption that some Brexit Labour voters were 'me first' and not together as one as they claim, untouched by the vice that creeps into the human soul and everywhere else but Labour.

bottom of page