585. Youthful folly (XIII)
Periodically, you will see people splinter from the Labour Party, sometimes the Conservatives, with purported concern for the “white working class”; and this is usually expressed as “concern” for white working-class boys—often reported to have fallen behind on exams. This is really a variation on the artificial leftist class game—a game where people play victim, whether as proletarians or the transgendered—and so is not really a move to the right; in a way, it is genuine fascism, as leftists usually say it is, because it is “socialism for us”—socialism for the nation, not international socialism.
This is one sub-group of political strategies that have been deployed for a long time. It includes “rights for whites” (customarily spelled “rites” on a placard), the Men’s Rights Movement, and the current LGB Alliance (supposedly the alliance for “really oppressed” gay people, not “pretend” gay people—the trans). These movements tend to provoke more hysteria and anger on the left than straightforward Toryism or traditional Christianity; why?
The answer lies in an implicit but unstated point in Western politics: it is implicitly understood by all sides in Western politics that the argument is over how the government should divide the spoils from the straight white majority (or from Europeans, since “whiteness” itself is part of the game). However, the game is predicated on the idea that nobody will admit to this fact. The idea that we need to “help white working-class boys” foregrounds what is implicit but forbidden to admit in the whole game and so provokes hysteria because it threatens to upset the game. Indeed, I once pointed out to an otherwise “empathetic” progressive liberal girl some statistic about how white men disproportionately suffer in some way. The response was “BOO-HOO. I’m so sorry. Whatever.” Woah, kinda vicious for someone who was otherwise very concerned about Syrian refugees…
To place it in family terms: the left is a spoilt teenage girl who likes to alternately pout and seduce her dad to get goodies from him—he is wealthy and good-natured and feels affection for his daughter, so he indulges her. They play a game where the daughter sulks or strokes and dad pretends to “think about it”; usually he eventually gives in. This is roughly the left-right dynamic in Western politics: the left thinks up reasons to sulk and conservatives go, “Hmmm, we need to think about it”—if they think too long there is a tantrum, then the conservatives usually give in.
When people talk about “the white working class” this is the equivalent to a situation whereby the daughter hints to daddy that she wants something and then he replies, “Actually, sweetheart, I’m in a lot of trouble at work and the doctor says I have problems with my heart; and sometimes I feel so sad I just can’t go on.” In other words, as if he turned the tables and played weak and pathetic as his daughter often does. The explosive rage “BOO-HOO” is not genuine hatred, it is fear—basically, the daughter, as with the left, counts on the straight white majority to have its act together and know what it is about and get on with it without complaint so that it can “fairly” reapportion their cut. Any indication that “daddy” in fact has no self-confidence or no idea what he is actually up to provokes contempt and panic that expresses itself in vituperative anger. “Help! I’m counting on you to know what’s up and now you tell me you don’t know!”.
Put simply: leftists implicitly accept that “white supremacy” is true; the “white working class” are superior because they are white; even if they are not as rich as an immigrant Indian computer programmer, they work naturally in the Western thought pattern, language, and sign system—they are not meant to complain, they are part of the organic system that the left “makes fairer” for outsiders (or, less charitably, parasites on to garnish their status without real value creation).