Is right-wing politics the new voice of the working class?

Is right-wing politics the new voice of the working class?
If so, why?

And why is socialism/left wing ideology so popular with the middle classes and students?

indoctrination of the masses

The commies smartened up and realised that the best way to win numbers is by targetting the middle class.
Easy, big demographic to capture.

when you bring different people together for education they stop seeing each other as the "other"

so population centers tend to be more socially liberal

backwards ideas can only survive in the sticks, protected in their safe space echo chambers

People on the right get pride and spiritual strength. People on the left gain emotional contentment.

Its quite simple. Left wing politics slowly turned more pro-immigration and immigrants take the working class jobs and so get hated by the majority of the working class. Right wing politicians are the only ones who promise to sort out immigration and so the working class vote shifted.

Globalism and multiculturalism is the same. Since globalism nowadays is accepted by "socialists" nationalists, even if they are anti-labour tend to be more in favor of the working class because globalism makes every worker cheaper as he can be replaced with a chink

left wing is exclusively internationalist today. Be it liberal left of orthodox (socialist) left. Internationalism (globalisation) is a direct threat to the working class who can't afford the benefits of internationalism and just suffer the adverse effects.

>so population centers tend to be more socially liberal

Which is why London has sharia patrol and these paki cunts would have their throats slit if they tried it up north? How progressive.

Because the left abandoned socialism and the middle classes don't know what it is.

Thatcher destroyed unions (which collectivised the working class) and pushed them towards more "individualist" employment (example: many cleaners are notionally self employed)

Blair fundamentally accepted Thatcher's economic ideology, which naturally encouraged opening the borders in the interests of businesses (especially since credit liberalization allowed wage stagnation to be hidden behind personal debt.)

Now the working class has noticed the immigrants and shifted right as a result, because even though closed borders and neoliberalism isn't as good as closed borders and a welfare state, it's better than open borders neoliberalism.

meanwhile the middle classes are socialist because it's "nice", a good proportion of them talk labour and vote tory too because they're afraid of interest rates going up under labour and fucking their mortgages.

The Working Class has always been socially conservative, and they become increasingly right-wing because they are the ones that bear the burden of multiculturalism, not the middle-classes they don't get it.

Schools and Universities play a massive role instilling socialism. It's always about "doing good" such as creating a welfare state, that's a good thing right? Expanding it so people get better help, that's a good thing? What about equal rights for this, that and that? Pacifism, that's a good thing to be isn't it? Helping refugees etc.

Lefties can't seem to fathom that in most cases, the head must rule the heart, and that these socialist policies are actually very destructive in the long run.

Globalisation isn't internationalism. Convincing the left that it is was the best slight-of-hand the right ever managed.

It's fairly simple to understand. Kikes start out by courting the white working class and forming parties to represent "the workers". Democratic party in America, Labour in UK, etc.

But the problem for the kikes is that the whites aren't totally aboard the cultural marxism bullshit. So the kikes take plan B: court minorities that will be down for whatever they want as long as the shitskins get gibs. And so the kikes begin importing millions and millions of shitskin voters to replace the white working class.

Right-wing politics is the new voice of the White working class, yes. We're tired of being oppressed from above by Jews and their elite collaborators and from below by their dark-skinned pawns.

Left-wing ideology is popular among middle class people and students because they never have to interact with minorities. If they had to they would become Reactionaries overnight.

Because as always the lower class bear the brunt of the upper classes stupidity while the middle class are terrified they will lose social and economic privilege.

It doesn't matter how many times the lower class lose their shit and chop off their rulers heads the next batch to rise to the top think it will never happen to them.

Yes it is, because right wingers are the only ones actually trying to create jobs and not steal anybody's money. Socialism is not popular in the middle class, only with women because they generally dont think and act on feelings which are really easy to manipulate. Students like socialism because they are spoiled little shits who think they're the centre of the universe and never had to pay any taxes. They think they are too smart to do research and see their opinions as fact despite being massively underinformed.

The effects are the same. THe left supports 'internationalism'. The right 'globalisation'. The end result is the same though. Free movement of goods and services around the planet. The right does it cause muh profit. The left cause they see the nation state as something to be removed.

False conciousness. The material 'success' of capitalism and the welfare state gives people a standard of living that is just bearable. Nationalism and racialism are used by the ruling classes to prevent the working class from working together for their own interest.

Because the labour party doesn't actually like poor working class people any more, they just hate the rich.
It's the party of the aspiring middle classes, well educated, guardian readers now, not the working class. They have lost touch with their core voting bloc, and as a result that demographic is deserting them.

In Scotland it left them en masse for the SNP, so I don't think you can say that right wing politics is the new voice of the working class.

But in England and Wales it is in the shape of UKIP.

Has "progressive" ever not meant savagery

The nation state should only be removed when the workers of the world have a revolution, which would require most of the world to be developed.

Globalisation exists to further exploitation (by increasing the pool of labour available to businessowners, letting them dodge regulations and taxes, etc.) and is essentially the antithesis of internationalism.

Removal of the nation state is a long-term goal of "the left" and even then not one all can agree on (Even Marx, iirc, accepted that the Irish had a right to self-determination for example whereas the modern "left" like Labour would reject Scotland's independence on the basis "hurr it makes a new border, borders are bad, what about the businesses?!".)

>only with women
The less socialist the Labour party is, the more women are drawn to it.

>The nation state should only be removed when the workers of the world have a revolution, which would require most of the world to be developed.

And yet we have anarchists and other assorted leftist retards marching for open/no borders today when we are nowhere near equal global development.

>Globalisation exists to further exploitation (by increasing the pool of labour available to businessowners, letting them dodge regulations and taxes, etc.) and is essentially the antithesis of internationalism.

My point isn't about the end goal. This will change with the global ruler. If the right put it in place the left can easily inherit and use the structures put in place by the right to push their own agenda. So yes, the motivations may vary but the effects on the ground for the masses of humanity effected by the policies are the same. As such, the internationalist left has essentially betrayed their supposed base.

>Even Marx, iirc, accepted that the Irish had a right to self-determination

Did Marx not also say that socialism could only happen in the west? See Sup Forums. He wasn't wrong about everything. He saw the brown hordes for what they are.

The working class have always been conservative, they just got indoctrinated by leftie faggots who made them think they were poor because someone had robbed them. The middle class are now a bunch of leftie faggots because they all go to universities filled with leftie faggot lecturers who think virtue signalling is more important than truth

Jesus this fucking graph... When will somebody just come out and call cunts and wogs on their take take take attitudes? Or are we just going to surrender all to them for the easy life?

Thing is with automation there is a need for more social support. But this CANNOT go hand in hand with open door immigration policy. There is a platform waiting fort the left. ,They just won't step up to it cause it means having to drop their commitment to top-down globalisation.

>And yet we have anarchists and other assorted leftist retards marching for open/no borders today when we are nowhere near equal global development.
They self-identify as a leftist, but I'm sure a right-winger would understand that simply identifying myself as a small-c-conservative while proposing a workers revolution and the destruction of the concept of gender wouldn't make me one.

The structures in place for globalism and the structures in place for internationalism are remarkably different. The left has nearly no use for a massive, convoluted international banking system, or for the free-trade agreements already established. They're useless. Similarly the structures of internationalism (would there be structures? if we're going communist, not really.) would be useless to any right-winger. You'd never see a situation along the lines of a "world government" for the left, perhaps on the neoliberal right (though currently "the centre" as well.) you'd see some government-like institutions to handle various parts of trade and hold the poorer countries heads under the water, as you see with the IMF etc. (yes, just open your borders to free trade and decimate domestic industry and we'll give you the loan you need. :^) )

>Did Marx not also say that socialism could only happen in the west
My recollection is that he was speaking in relation to the conditions of the time. (He did after all think Germany, not Russia would be the birthplace of revolution.)

>take take take attitudes.

1. degeneracy, family values being lost
2. common knowledge about flaws of too much socialism

Socialism doesn't win anymore by defending the actual downtrodden, instead it focuses on social propaganda via education and media. If you relied on the working class then you would not be able to creates as many sophist arguments to destroy the west

I would be careful about using the words 'new voice', this more like a dying scream, we are far too late to fix anything

He said socialism could only SUCCEED in the West, and almost a century after 1917, I'd say he's been proved right.

Because the left decided to abandon the white working class, and instead try to permanently alter the voting makeup of the country by flooding it with immigrants who would be dependent on government welfare.

The first and most obvious result of flooding a country with migrants is a decrease in wage pressure, which hits the working class the hardest.

This isn't some paranoid conspiracy, this is literally what labour has admitted to doing during the early 00's. Their initial prediction when opening up our borders to europe was about 30,000 people a year. They since went "woops, its actually 300,000" and has been every year since, roughly.

Its why brexit won, and the left STILL doesn't understand this.

Because Socialism doesn't give the working man a say in the government or alleviate any problems. It only pretends to.

Working class are more affected by immigration. Middle class people go to university and get indoctrinated by fifth column subversives planted there during the Cold War. The right is rising, brothers.

> Similarly the structures of internationalism (would there be structures? if we're going communist, not really.)

Your left is a fantasy m8. The structures, that is centralised power can be bent to suit whoever is in charge at any given time. Communism (socialism without hierarchy) is a pipe-dream. So yes, globalisation does suit very well today's real power players on the left, your Fabian Society and the likes.

>You'd never see a situation along the lines of a "world government" for the left, perhaps on the neoliberal right (though currently "the centre" as well.) you'd see some government-like institutions to handle various parts of trade and hold the poorer countries heads under the water,

So we'll have a government and just not call it that? You lefties and your word-games never cease to amuse me.

>meme arrowing me

I'm tempted to tell you that's not an argument. Unless I misunderstand you? My assertion is that pakis and cunts will vote for free shit and not even be coy about it. Am I wrong?

Close enough. So is this to say that Marx wasn't an internationalist? Or did he envision himself and his cadre as the 'philosopher kinds' benevolently guiding the backwards of the earth?

>right-wing politics the new voice of the working class. Is so, why?

Because populists like Trump and Farage have changed the rhetoric to where it should be. Before it was compassionate liberals against the logical conservatives. Neither side truly appealed to the working class who just wanted a paycheck to help their children.

> why is socialism/left wing ideology so popular with the middle class and students?

> the middle class
Before labor unions (in theory) were the working class's voice against their bosses.

>students
Two reasons, one is professors are liberal fucking think-tanks. This leads to the second reason, many students never had exposure to left wing politics until they get to college because their parents are usually conservatives. This means that they now not only get to rebel against the "old ideas" of the conservatives and they have college professors to encourage this rebellion.

(These are general cases-- there are obviously exceptions)

Its fairly easy. Working class people are stupid as fuck and expect politicians to change something about their position in society.

> they vote left
> nothing changes for them
> get upset
> vote right
> same thing happens

Workers expect people to lift them out of their low class life, when nobody but themselves can do it (though it obviously is easier under right leaning governments).

The "new" voice? No, it's just idiots finally waking up. True conservative politics are better for everyone.

>Its why brexit won, and the left STILL doesn't understand this.

No they understand it perfectly. They see it as a means to an end, and the end justifying the means. Pretty fucking funny hearing the talking heads on the BBC world service talking about globalistiaon. Generally the setup is to have both sides of an argument represented. But in this case both sides agreed that globalisation was a force for good and that the plebs just didn't understand.

right wing politics appeals to the lowest common denominators...i.e dumb people....i.e people who lack the cognitive faculties to find well paid jobs

>centralised power can be bent to suit whoever is in charge at any given time
There would be no centralised power. That's in nobodies interests.
>Communism (socialism without hierarchy) is a pipe-dream
Then internationalism would go no further than friendly relations between nations. The open-borders period would never occur.
>your Fabian Society and the likes.
For "l" please substitute "k"
The Fabian Society are to Thatcher's right nowadays. They're a lingering vestige of Blairism. They whole-heartedly sold out. If they're left wing, I'm a rainbow coloured wolf named pedestal.
>So we'll have a government and just not call it that?
It wouldn't be a government per-se. It'd be the sort of thing you see with the WTO and IMF.

>meme arrowing me
I was being a retard and left in what was going to be a reply in another post. I was trying to quote.

>My assertion is that pakis and cunts will vote for free shit and not even be coy about it. Am I wrong?
Yes. For more than half of that graph, the women voted Conservative even as unemployment hit 10%. They didn't even vote for Blair in 1997.

You're right in the sense that they voted for more shit, but it was never in the form of government handouts (unless we count tax-cuts.)

>Two reasons, one is professors are liberal fucking think-tanks. This leads to the second reason, many students never had exposure to left wing politics until they get to college because their parents are usually conservatives. This means that they now not only get to rebel against the "old ideas" of the conservatives and they have college professors to encourage this rebellion.

Good answer but there's more to it than this. For pretty much my entire life tehre has been a backdrop of right = evil, mean spirited rich whtie men and left = oppositin to them. Or put more simply, left good, right bad. This is reenforced in language. Left is progressive. So right must be 'regressive'. Left is liberal. So right must be illiberal. Essentially, if the right opinion setters came out and told a bunch of 16 year olds that curb-stomping white babies was leftism, they'd believe it and believe they were doing good.

And here we have ladies and gents, the one true leftist.

Leftists wuch as yourself and left/pol/ are free to mspout as much high-minded good sounding shit as you like cause you have no interest or even plan for implementing it. Voting is reformist so you absolve yourself of blame come elections then get straight back on your soapbox critiquing the right for exactly the same reasons the liberal left does, and slating the active left for either being IDpol shitters or noit being true leftists. Essentially your position is nothing more than a moral high-horse. That none of your ideas will ever come to fruition actually improves your position because you will never be held to account.

Sorry if this comes across as abrasive, I just get sick of the idea among most of the left that the left can do no wrong.

Because the Left cannot get anything done. People want results.

Left-wing ideology was never a voice for the working class. It was always the ideology of the ivory tower academic, used by middle/upper class useful idiots to swindle the lower class to work for them.

>good answer but there's more to this
Fully agreed. I didn't want to drag on too long so I tried to keep it brief, especially when I'm on fucking mobile.

College students, in general, are either dead set into their opinions or completely wishy-washy and could compromise their entire morality for the sake of a talking point.

The conservative students who are dead set in their ideals begin looking like "mean terrible people" because of language like what you noted. "Well, we're progressive! THAT guy wants to put us back 60 years!" This is hurt even worse on college campuses where the professors can pull their age and "experience" against any opposition. "You don't know what racism is like, I lived in the 60s, during the civil rights movement! And I can say that Trump's a racist!" (Nevermind that they were a fucking political activist back in the 60s and have never held a real job in the private sector their entire lives).

All of this leads to the wishy-washy students deciding that they don't want to be racist or "on the wrong side of history!" so they start abandoning their parent's religion, switching parties to the polar opposite of their parents, and start rallying at these BLM riots---err--- "peaceful protests" because they want to look like they did something. They want to be like their professor and brag how "I DID something in 2010's in the 'second civil rights movement'!"

>years later when they realize that their BLM rallies didn't help them get a job, they start bitching about how the "system is out to get them"
>if they're too indoctrinated, they'll start looking at Bernie Sanders
>if they finally woke the fuck up, they start voting for Trump

Nice 9/11.

>because they want to look like they did something.


Yeah, I think this is a big part of it. They saw the protests of the 60s and want to give meaning to their own lives, so they try to recreate it. Call it virtue signalling, call it what you will, it is transparent as fuck. Everyone can see it for what it is. But the media won't call them on it for fear of being branded part of the 'insidious right wing conspiracy'.

>>if they finally woke the fuck up, they start voting for Trump

Fortunately the next generation is there to pick up the slack. Think what you will about 'cultural marxism' as a whole, but the part described here has clearly been played out perfectly.

Middle/left robs rules over the workers.

Workers want rights not an abolition of rights and a bourgeise dictatorship like in soviet union

Universities have a huge left-wing bias because most of what they work with are 20th century neomarxist theories from europe and even people in non-humanities departments are forced to take those propaganda courses to complete breadth requirements. My engineering degree requires 4 credits in post-colonial studies, can you believe that?

Universities are essentially propaganda machines for far-left thought.