The Guardian: How Labour Lost

How did the Labour Party lose? I’m sure the story is essentially no different than what has become of the Democratic Party since the 1960s and 1970s.

It was captured by upper middle class metropolitan liberals and woke activists who waged a demographic, economic and culture war against the White working class while offering them nothing but handouts. Tony Blair and Bill Clinton also embraced the worst of neoliberal economics. This has set off an endless cycle of backlash politics which has driven the orphaned working class into conservatism. That’s how we got Donald Trump, BREXIT and Boris Johnson.

The scene in the documentary below with the older voter in Jaywick or at the election in Stoke-on-Trent could be anywhere in the South or Midwest. The London Bridge terrorist Usman Khan who killed Jack Merritt was “born and bred” in Stoke-on-Trent. He ain’t no terrorist. The government of the United Kingdom is also more interested in keeping people like me out of the country than jihadists like Usman Khan. It is liberalism gone insane.

The Guardian:

“For the crisis is not Labour’s alone. It is a crisis of social democracy that has been gripping the left the world over. So far Labour has bucked the trend, not least because our voting system artificially pumps the party up, as it did in 2005 and 2017. But political gravity cannot be resisted for ever.

Labour now joins the ranks of the French socialists, the German SPD, the Dutch social democrats, the Australian Labor party and so many others in or near the departure lounge of politics. And the test here is not “can you be fleetingly in office?”, but “are you a growing and energetic force capable of addressing the climate crisis and big capital; are you a force for the transformation that society needs?” Unless we understand what’s happened, and how such a force is now created, then any recovery will be built on sand.

Like a leaking pipe, social democracy has been in slow decline for decades. The erosion of class identities, the decline of factory production that produced social solidarity, and then the fall of communism – all pulled the rug from beneath the feet of social democracy. It lost its agency and its method of operation. It lost everything.

Next came globalisation, individualisation and consumerisation. Labour eventually adapted to the terrain in the shape of New Labour, but that sugar rush of repositioning only worked by sowing the deeper seeds of discontent we saw erupt yesterday. …”

Do you remember the Solid South? It voted for FDR four times. It was liberalism which brought an end to the New Deal coalition in the 1960s and 1970s. It was decades of neoliberalism which deindustrialized the Rust Belt. It was liberalism which flooded Britain with Third World immigrants and which also deindustrialized the north and Midlands.

Imagine a Labour activist snarling at an older White working class voter and calling him a bigot for using the wrong pronoun because he doesn’t understand why he has to believe in a thousand different genders or why it is a good thing that he is becoming a minority in his own country. Antifa are the militant expression of this group. The toxic middle class liberal and their absurd ideas are the rub of the problem. The “far right” which voted for Farage, BREXIT and UKIP are mostly former Labour voters who are social conservatives who are fed up with it.

About the Author

Hunter Wallace
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

16 Comments on "The Guardian: How Labour Lost"

  1. “Do you remember the Solid South? It voted for FDR four times. It was liberalism which brought an end to the New Deal coalition in the 1960s and 1970s.”

    Liberalism was part of the FDR program from the beginning. It was FDR who popularized the word “liberal” in the sense we use it now.

    • The meaning of the term “liberal” has changed significantly over the past century.

      A century ago, “liberal” meant classical liberal and was coming to mean progressive. After the Great Depression, liberalism became associated with reform liberalism or embedded liberalism, which was the Keynesian era of social democracy which lasted down until the late 1970s. In the 1950s and 1960s, liberalism was transformed again and came to mean cosmopolitan modernist. Since the 1980s, liberalism has tended to mean neoliberalism which means cultural deregulation and using the state to push globalization.

      • Since the 1980s, liberalism has tended to mean neoliberalism which means cultural deregulation and using the state to push globalization.

        That’s only true among the politically informed. (In America anyway; in Europe, it’s always had this meaning.) But when the average Joe complains about “liberals,” he has in mind the intrusive “big government” variety.

        • Europe has gone through roughly the same transition of “embedded liberalism” or a more social democratic version of liberalism which was dominant from end of World War II to the 1980s to neoliberalism which has been dominant since the 1980s. Simon Reid Henry has a great book about it called Empire of Democracy. I’ve posted multiple excerpts from it.

    • Good examples about differences between Western and Eastern mindset. Western man want everything now. I want cancer cure today not 10 years after my death.

      Eastern man understands, that really big things take time and patience. For example, when you plan to make global change, then you must be patient and give your enemies such a good life, so they vote you into office 4 times and you have time to carefully prepare and execute your plans so that outcome is brilliant and most important, long lasting.

      FDR legacy crushing Nazis and white supremacists and confederates even 74 years after his death.. This how real war and real victory looks like.

      FDR made something called strategic retreat. He catered Solid South 4 terms, long enough to make irrecoverable long term changes. I wonder how long Donald should carry water for Jews to make the same changes for Jewry. So that 74 years after Donald death, when somebody scream Jew, angry mob will beat this person and police does nothing.

      Even the names are the same. FDR called his genocide policy New Deal. And Donald also talks about deals all the time. Real war is not about guns and knights, real war is about long lasting love story before victim understand that 4 term love story was actually a death kiss.

      Donald returns the FDR favor. He is giving the Jews Jerusalem, Golan heights and a lot of things more. After Donald death, Israel and Solid Jew is dissolved and existing only in infighting websites, .which nobody reads.

      • So, you agree with me that “The Donald,” in showing such blatant favoritism to the Jews is, in fact, “killing them with kindness?” The question is, whether Trump is doing this with that outcome in mind OR he’s too infatuated with them to see that he is destroying any pretense they have of being the World’s Biggest Victims rather than the most privileged?

        It seems to me that, since the Trump Administration” recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and built the American Embassy there, that REAL acts of antisemitism, violent acts, not non-violent hoaxes of painted swastikas by the Usual Suspects are occurring much more frequently.

        And the kicker is, it’s not by “White Supremacists,” but by so-called people of color. The very ones that Jews are so rabid to let into White populations.

        • Yes, I agree that Donald is killing them with kindness. I do not know why he is doing this but Donald is the greatest anti Semite in all times.

          Invisible factor is the Eastern military term, which means that you must investigate enemy under the microscope and find enemy weak places. Mostly those weak places are in enemy character.

          For example, when you want to get rid from careerist, then promote him hard, so that his incompetency, luck of leadership skills and all other bad things will be visible to everybody. Stalin made his purges by promotions.

          When you have grand uncle, who drinks, don`t fight with him. Better be the best friend and bring him bottle every day. Sooner or later car crash or fire or whatever alcohol related problem happens.

          When you have ethnic group who`s weakness is greed, then give them more than they ask. Strategic retreat must be YUUUUGE, When you give enemy a little bit like Jerusalem or Golan heights, then even dumbest soldiers like Napoleon or Hitler understand that they are lured to pre planned trap.

          This is the difference between battle and the war. After the battle, enemy roars back after few years. Like Obama did 28 years after Reagan.

          After the war, there will be no enemy anymore. Mongol Empire and Swedish Empire and France and Germany are no threat to Russia anymore.

          Winning a battle is like building a wall. Winning a war is getting rid from enemy so we do not need a border whatsoever.

  2. The Guardian’s writer missed the point, too. He kept framing the dissatisfaction and alienation of the voter in cultural Marxist talking points. As if the average voter gives a ratpoop about climate change or being empowered, whatever that means. The UK voting public didn’t make a real change, anyhow. They just went to the other major party to thumb their collective nose at Labour. No substantive changes in how Cuck Island will be run have been made. Johnson has boasted about how pro-immigration he is, for example. Unless the Brits (and Americans, for that matter) wake up and are willing to do something about the existential issue of demographic replacement, voting for a major party becomes just another meaningless consumer choice, like going back and forth between Coke and Pepsi.

    As TPTB in most countries will not serve the needs of the peasantry, the only hope the peons have is to either revolt or start the slow process of saving their own culture and people through developing parallel institutions. The most effective examples of the latter so far have been through religious affiliation. I’ve even read anarchists saying the best thing they can do when forming communal groups is to file with the gov’t as a religious institution. That way, they won’t just not pay taxes, they’ll most likely come under way less scrutiny.

    • We need the whole decaying and pozzed Zog world to collapse. Even parallel communities would fail due to infiltration by bad actors and unrelenting barrages by TPTB. Should a model community somehow begin to thrive without Zog noticing, it would not stay under jewdar for long. Somebody will get cocky and expose the sapling before it could bloom and serve as an example for others to follow.

      Sorry to be a blackpill, but in an era of zero privacy, and the younger generations posting everything from what they have had for lunch to sexual conquests online, a clandestine operation of this sort would need Manhattan Project secrecy. Loose lips sink ships.

      • I completely disagree with your premise that once a community is “discovered,” it must then be automatically destroyed. It depends on the cultural glue that the community is based on. Culture comes before politics. I believe you’re strongly materialist, if I’ve read your other comments right. Many of us are religious, and religion can be an extremely potent social and cultural base for us critters. A moral island in the midst of multiculti chaos holds a lot of appeal for many people. Perhaps your assumptions are partially based on the idea that young people having tech means they will be turned into cosmopolitan automatons. I’m familiar with many parents that limit access to tech, and have safeguards on what their kids use. Not all parents use tech as electronic babysitters, especially those with a mistrust of current cultural norms. Even Steve Jobs and Bill Gates had tight restrictions on their kids. Jobs didn’t like his progeny using computers at all, if I correctly recall. I think he allowed them to use tech, of course, but under strictly controlled circumstances. The competent wizards understand the effects their spells can have on others.

        You’re also going on the false assumption that such an “operation” would have to be clandestine. What I’ve said on other threads is that a gathering of like-minded people coming together and building a community is the goal. Within that community, the members will not be a hive mind, of course. But there will have to be a common set of principles most will accept and want to follow. Principles focusing on family and community naturally lend themselves to nationalism, and as society becomes more fractured, the tribalism that is a default setting in human nature will re-emerge among the pale people. I hope, anyway. As such a community will by current standards be made up of a minority mindset, that is why I’ve also suggest interconnected homeschool and small/home business networks, home churches or a community chapel, independent community media and entertainment (whether they do their own or rely on trusted sources), etc., etc. A sense of belonging is also a strong social adherent.

        If you object to the religiosity of such a project, there are “co-housing” developments going on here and in Europe. People have their own houses, with a common hall where meals are shared and social gatherings take place. There are communitarian groups of many different types you could use as a model. All of them are out in the open. But most people don’t know about them, even in this glorious internet age. From anarchists to urban organic farmers to polyamorous types, if you want to join a community, it’s out there. Within the metro area I’m in, I’m aware of lay religious groups centered around various neighborhoods. And 99% of people have no idea they exist. (I’m Christian (horrors!), so my focus would naturally lean that way.) But if you want to set up an atheist neighborhood group, go for it. A Darwinian society might have a strong pull in some areas.

        BTW, being religious hasn’t kept me from hating science. I’ve gotten the impression you think believing in God means I must hate scientific research. Research that doesn’t pay attention to potential social costs bothers me, but I’m cognizant and appreciative of possible benefits from such endeavors. I hope this isn’t overly simplistic, but such ideas as particles changing based on being observed (and therefore the observer), phenotypes are a combo of gene and environment, negentropy, etc., etc., have helped me in many ways on many topics. They serve as keys that open doors leading to rooms I might not have entered otherwise. But I get inspiration from anywhere and everywhere.

  3. I think you need to do a series of articles on the Jewish Putsch to ELIMINATE ANY AND ALL CRITICISM of the DEICIDES, for religious, political, or racial reasons. In short, the Boshevization of America. And Jewish bloodlust for vengeance against Christ’s own!!!

    https://dailystormer.name/jew-oligarch-ronald-lauder-launches-new-jewish-terror-organization/

  4. “It was captured by upper middle class metropolitan liberals and woke activists who waged a demographic, economic and culture war against the White working class while offering them nothing but handouts.”

    I take offense to this statement. It absolutely offered us and them the most sought after prize of all….. destructive, toxic, suicidal multiculturalism. While we were battling their third-rate Third World soldiers (media and politicians included), they were busy destroying our nations by looting them. Who benefited? Who was immune to the terror unleashed?

    Does revenge have a statute of limitations on planet Earth? There’s plenty of time and we are a very, very patient people.

    “When people have nothing left to lose they lose it,” ~ Gerald Celente

    And, that’s where we are headed.

  5. Labour now joins the ranks of the French socialists, the German SPD, the Dutch social democrats, the Australian Labor party and so many others in or near the departure lounge of politics.

    The Australian Labor Party is officially divided into two factions, the Labor Left and the Labor Right. In the aftermath of the federal election defeat earlier this year – considered by many to be unlosable – the reigning Right leader resigned and a seemingly old-style leftie took over the reins. He struck me as a more down to earth type, who might mouth agreement with woke platitudes – to be critical would only strengthen conservatives seems to be the thinking – so I was surprised how quickly he caved into demands to dump the leader of one Australia’s biggest unions after the union leader had been portrayed as “anti-woman” (he’d made some comments critical of some dopey femmcunt). Despite electoral thrashings, I have a feeling leftist parties are going to remain a woke joke for quite some time yet.

  6. I am an American; I don’t care about British, Italian, German, Hungarian, Russian, or Chinese politics. I’ve been told from a young age that I should be deeply invested in American politics.

    Yet, realistically, I know my vote has never mattered. Furthermore, Senator Charles A. Lindbergh’s vote against the formation of the Federal Reserve didn’t matter. Going back to immediately after the Revolutionary War with the Whiskey Rebellion you can see what mattered. Control, plain and simple. Whether it be through banking or bayonet.

    The Tories have merely performed the classic political theater element of “regime change.” There ain’t no black asses getting marched up the gangplank of the Windrush and shipped back to the shithole from whence they came. Politicians are totally isolated from the problems they create. Not only that, the problems they create ensure that they maintain job security. The next election cycle the problem they created in the current election cycle they solemnly vow to solve.

    The people’s voices were merely muttering halfheartedly about mutiny, this election was just throwing them a bone to gnaw on.

  7. Captain John Charity Spring MA | December 15, 2019 at 6:21 am |

    The Windrush in reverse. Played backwards. Ooohhhhh if only.

Comments are closed.