Friday, March 27, 2009

Making The World Like China

A Chi-Com Ur-apparatchik named Wang Qishan has published an editorial in today's 'Times' entitled 'G20 must look beyond the needs of the top 20'.
Its tone of concern for the world's poor must be contrasted with its author's adherence to a philosophy which has been responsible for the deaths of tens, if not hundreds, of millions of his fellow Chinese. The Chinese Communist Party started doing concern for the poor when its members realised they could wet more lips more efficiently through the Chinese peoples' transformation from being exploited slaves of Communism into being exploited slaves of both Communism and Capitalism.
Liberalism, a doctrine invented by the rich and solely for the rich, has done nothing but produce generations of well-heeled guilty and godless. The liberal excuse for the exploitation of China's poor has been that it has resulted in millions being lifted out of poverty; that this has only been capable of being achieved by a process of global labour arbitrage, the same goods once made in Cheshire now being made in China, producing a predictable flattening and destruction of the outsourced and offshored's incomes and prospects, is either ignored or held by economic liberals to be a good and wholesome thing - by losing your job you are doing your bit for international development, whether you want to or not.
In this posture, liberal internationalists have the unappealing habit of sounding like an Irish nun attempting moral blackmail on a classroom of innocent eight year olds; children in Africa are starving, while you throw away your crusts. One wonders how many people have been pushed off the path to God by such sermons; yet one can only hope that the repetition of the same type of message by the globalists will produce the same revulsion towards their revolting doctrines as the bad preaching of God's word had upon generations of people who were morally blackmailed as children.
The great fallacy of economic liberalism is that everyone thinks the same way. It should go without saying that this has never been the case. Many of the world's poor are poor because their civil cultures are comprised of nothing but stupidity, ignorance and greed. It is disheartening to see some writers adhere to the myth that Magna Carta had anything to do with the liberty of the general public. It did not; just like the vaunted Declaration of Arbroath, it was a mechanism by which the barons, local gangsters whose word was law, asserted privileges for themselves. At that stage in the histories of England and Scotland, the best ways to get rich were the type of rapine and pillage that ensured political control of a fiefdom. The Magna Carta barons had more in common with Sam Giancana than Samuel Wilberforce.
In his book 'America's Half-Blood Prince', Steve Sailer makes the same type of point; that in Africa the best way to get rich is to control the government. Kenya now is like England then; and China now is like England then. Show me a Chi-Com who's developed a business from scratch that hasn't involved the use of exploited labour and who hasn't insisted on the appropriation of intellectual property, and you will see a flying pig shortly thereafter.
Some of the more astute American observers of globalisation have noted that the process of mass immigration is turning the country into a chaotic Latin American hellhole. There are those who say that this is the plan of America's elites; suffused with false notions of their own exceptionalism, they really would prefer to be patrons controlling their peons' lives and opportunities rather than free citizens of a free republic. I would respectfully suggest that such critics are directing their ire in the wrong place.
In the United Kingdom, the liberty of the individual is under threat as it has never been before. Within living memory, wars both hot and cold have been fought against the forces of political totalitarianism. Yet political totalitarianism might just have been the only bulwark against a force just as oppressive and totalitarian - the universal totalitarianism of internationalist economics.
We recall how we criticised the Soviet Communists for spying on their slaves, and interfering with their private lives; yet the British government now does precisely the same things, and its hacks and shills say that this is a good and wholesome thing, in the interests of 'security'. That security has only been compromised by the introduction of a hostile and alien ideology through immigration is a truth that none dare speak - to holds view contrary to those of the elites is to render yourself liable to prosecution. The short-sightedness of our lawyers has seen to that.
We are becoming not Mexico, but China. One of the most pressing reasons why I feel that an election is necessary this year is that if Gordon Brown's government continues in office much longer, elements within it will seek to behave even more injudiciously, even more oppressively, than they have done already. Freedom of speech, freedom of protest, the right of free association, and the right of freedom of conscience are all under threat; only a totalitarian ideology could believe these erosions to be good and wholesome things. This totalitarianism defines wealth as a process of entropy - the diminution in your earnings caused by global labour arbitrage means that the stuff you buy is cheaper, so you're still getting richer and should be happy. This process continues until you earn nothing, and the stuff you buy costs nothing. Such philosophies aren't just guff - they're garbage. People are interested in more than just stuff.
Globalisation, a top down movement just like Magna Carta and the Reformation, a development nobody's voted for but which our rulers tell us is going to happen anyway, is not about making China like the rest of the world - it's about making the rest of the world like China. Get used to it.


Blogger PJMULVEY said...

Martin...great points made with passion. Whether Mexican immigration is being orchestrated by the elites; Mexican government; or desperation of people betrayed by their government and only wanting a better life, I do not know for sure. It is probably a combination of all three. But, the end result of the last 20 years is the establishment of a significant minority of individuals whose subservient indigenous culture and paternalistic view of government, makes them easy pawns of the socialists within the USA to manipulate for their own nefarious purpose - the destruction of individual liberty and freedom.

28 March, 2009 06:51  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home