This post nails it about left wing voters on Mumsnet over the last two days

[ProudAmberTurtle]

It's by an ex-academic on X, about posts on Reddit over the last 48 hours but is equally applicable to Mumsnet, where I can seeing posts stating things like:

"How stupid are Reform voters? Don't they realise they'll get fewer benefits?!"

The irony is of course that it's those posters who need to be educated, not the working class voters they mock because they think they're thick.

Here you go:

Reading through Reddit threads in which leftists/progressives express their bewilderment/confusion/fury at working class English voters for casting their lot in with Reform, one of the things I'm starting to understand is this:

They simply do not understand how a government could help working-class people in any other way besides giving them benefits, handouts, and other free things.

Their entire mental architecture is premised upon the premises that

1. Working class people are poor
2. The only way for them to not be poor is for the state to give them free stuff
3. So left-wing parties need to promise them lots of free stuff

Then, when these working-class voters instead vote for right-of-centre parties who instead promise an economy in which they can build a career, start their own business, make a financial success of themselves and start a family, they're confused.

Because, again, in their mental architecture, what the working class are supposed to want is free benefits from the state.

But what they actually want is a fair shake at making their own way in the world, making money, getting on in life.

And the left simply doesn't understand that what these voters want from the state is an economy in which they can actually do this.

x.com/i/status/2053073719086469193

Jesus Christ. There's some crazy comments on MN but this one tops them all for blind ignorance. Just sod off love. An old saying in Bradford was " too bloody daft to talk to " and you fit the bill.

@InstantlyBella you,are once more spouting nonsense.

Both Labour and Tories are in favour of large scale immigration.

Tories because of cheap labour and to cut costs by bringing in doctors, engineers etc from abroad rather than train our own.

Labour because they are globalists in their hearts and they believe in open borders and they see immigrants as natural Labour supporters.

Their thinking is that anyone who doesn't go along with this must be called a thicko and a racist until they can be made to shut up. They also try to gaslight people into thinking they are interested in controlling our borders.

Net migration is down and will fall further

Large scale immmigration is not happening.

The hukou system means that rural migrants cannot get the benefits that are due to the children of urban residents. Whether you agree with it or not, it means that residents are not pushed out in favor of newcomers. It also means you have a place to send homeless people and criminals (back to their hometowns).

Labour only have themselves to blame because they failed to properly sayisfy the needs of the immigrant communities in this country and now many of them will look to the Green Party who do value what they need. Instead they pandered to the ever dwindling white working class base who are becoming increasingly democratically irrelevant as they get smaller demographically.

I don't care to advise them on policy because I am fully behind the Green party but if Labour were smart, they would rally fully behind Gaza, promise robust legislation against islamophpbic rhetoric online and work with these communities to open up more avenues of immigration in exchange for full support in the following general election.

Labour made the mistake to try and appeal to Reform voters and their anti immigration rhetoric was part of that.

Hukou. That's it.

Why would it push urban residents out ? The way I understood it was it was originally to stop the masses flocking to the cities. And to keep the farmers growing food. Now it is used as a mechanism to get coastal money to the interior. Migrant workers leaving kids in the hometowns and all that.

Large scale immmigration is not happening.
It has already happened.

I love the fact that an extra m has managed to migrate into your spelling of immigration.

It has already happened.......

So what do you want to happen next now net migration is falling?

@RedTagAlan The Chinese government do not believe that everyone should be equal. Deng Xiaoping famously said "let some people get rich first" to help the economy. They have explicitly said that they believe equality destroys productivit. They also believe in economic and social hierarchy. This links to confucianism. So although the Chinese use Marxist terminology, they do not believe it and are much more tighly welded to traditional Chinese culture and confucian principles, which includes being rewarded for hard work.
IMO, China should reject Marxist terminology. They already have to an extent by saying they use socialism with Chinese characteristics.
Vietnam is following the same model as China.
You particular question-"should Marxist countries change how the proletariat are defined?" is problematic because I don't think China and Vietnam are Marxist countries. They have long parted ways with Marxism as they have market driven economies. While this has happened, everyone has got richer. During the 1970s, when China was closer to classical Marxism, people were starving in China.
Cuba is closer to classical Marxism and is much poorer as a result.

@hedgeknight
I think the issue in the UK is wealth inequality not income inequality. Accumulated wealth for the top 1% in terms of assets, compounding investment returns and property has increased significantly so that even top earners are unlikely to ever catch up. This could be one of the reasons why are economy is stalling. If money is held in property or assets then it is is unproductive areas. Labour's idea of just taxing businesses and working people more does not help the economy.-it is leading to increased unemployment. On the other hand, I think that we do need to think about how to tax wealth. I don't believe in Reform's view of reducing inheritance tax partly for this reason. I also think that may be capital gains tax (minus the investment ) should be more aligned with income tax. The Right do not want the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer but they do want the economy to thrive. We do need to think about how to tax wealth more (unproductive assets) and prevent tax avoidance. Increasing NI was a foolish move for Labour as makes it harder for businesses to make a profit and employ people. Businesses need to be able to thrive to create a better economy, which makes everyone richer over time.

I recognise you from another thread. You are a Muslim convert "revert" who believes it is fine to flog people under Sharia law "if you can't do the time don't do the crime".

How does Muslim/Sharia law fit with the Greens support for gay people and transgender people?

The last 14 years do not evidence 'the Right do not want the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer but they do want the economy to thrive.'

good lord lol they should absolutely not do that

I'm not sure what you are getting at.
We need a smaller population. And we need them (and their jobs) spread more evenly, not concentrated into mega-cities.

there are only so many school spaces, for one. You have easier registration at public hospitals (private is really not affordable to the average Joe), government jobs favored or prioritized for locals.

But it was just great to have that continuity. Would there be many true Londoners left?

For instance, I had the privilege of speaking to someone who was present at the incident that sparked the Cultural Revolution (she insists she did not help murder the school principal incidentally) but the locals have all kinds of stories like this, really gives life and color to a city.

She is the problem.

Point proved.

@hedgeknight
Income inequality was flat between 2010-2024 under the conservatives. Since Labour came into power income inequality has also been flat. It has been stable for the last 30 years-under Labour and Conservatives.
Wealth inequality has increased for various reasons including 1) Global asset boom 2) Housing supply shortages-so property prices have gone up. This our increasing population. 3) Quantitative easing after the 2008 financial crisis and covid which led to more bonds on the market, which wealthier people buy.

You're so funny Bella. Thanks for the laughs babe.

This is an interesting take on the subject. I wish it was an article rather than a link to x as I’d be interested to read it and find out more about the author. I would question where right wing governments had helped the working classes in recent years too though. They don’t seem to have improved life for any demographic amongst anyone I know.

😂so wouldn't get any British born votes? actually, this would be nice, you should advise them. They'd compete with Greens for the same immigrants votes, Brits would be left with choice between Tory and Reform. Having far right wing of Tory already moved to Reform, Tory will become appealing to much wider base. I like this scenario

I am wondering how you propose we get a smaller population.

Net migration down
Birth rates down
No mass immigration (or immmigration if you that makes you chuckle)

What else would you suggest?

So the UK population is still growing solely driven by immigration, as you correctly point out the birth rate continues to fall and is currently 1.44 which is below the replacement level of 2.1.

in order to reduce the population that leaves two options reduce immigration further and encourage further emigration (not helped by Brexit).

A smaller UK population is both environmentally and economically (depending on who leaves) favourable.

Encourage emigration. as in remigration?

And who would you encourage?