If true Socialists support free movement into the UK?

Question

Will they stand up for the UK people who struggle to get jobs because the job market has become flooded? Who then end up struggling on benefits?

Answer 1

They only seem to stand up for lining their own pockets and their friends.

Answer 2

Read George Orwell's most informative documentary: "The Road to Wigan Pier" freely avaiable for downloading on-line.

The contents are pretty much significant today as they were 70 years ago.

The Road to Wigan Pier was written by George Orwell and published in 1937. It is a sociological analysis of living conditions in the industrial north of England before World War II - ORWELL spent the period from 31 January to 30 March 1936 living in Barnsley, Sheffield and Wigan researching the book.[1]

The book is divided into two sections.

PART TWO

In contrast to the straightforward documentary of the first part of the book, in part two Orwell discusses the relevance of socialism to improving living conditions. This section proved controversial.

Orwell sets out his initial premises very simply

Are the appalling conditions described in part 1 tolerable? (No)

Is socialism “wholeheartedly applied as a world system” capable of improving those conditions? (Yes)

Why then are we not all socialists?

The rest of the book consists of Orwell’s attempt to answer this difficult question.

He points out that most people who argue against socialism do not do so because of straightforward selfish motives, or because they do not believe that the system would work, but for more complex emotional reasons, which (according to Orwell) most socialists misunderstand. He identifies 5 main problems.

Class prejudice. This is real and it is visceral. Middle class socialists do themselves no favours by pretending it does not exist and - by glorifying the manual worker - they tend to alienate that large section of the population which is economically working class but culturally middle class.

Machine worship.

Orwell finds most socialists guilty of this.

Orwell himself is suspicious of technological progress for its own sake and thinks it inevitably leads to softness and decadence. He points out that most fictional technically advanced socialist utopias are deadly dull. H.G. Wells in particular is criticised on these grounds.

Crankiness. Amongst many other types of people Orwell specifies people who have beards or wear sandals, vegetarians, and nudists as contributing to socialism's negative reputation among many more conventional people.

Turgid language. Those who pepper their sentences with “notwithstandings” and “heretofores” and become over excited when discussing dialectical materialism are unlikely to gain much popular support.

Failure to concentrate on the basics. Socialism should be about common decency and fair shares for all rather than political orthodoxy or philosophical consistency.

In presenting these arguments Orwell takes on the role of devil's advocate. He states very plainly that he himself is in favour of socialism but feels it necessary to point out reasons why many people, who would benefit from socialism, and should logically support it, are in practice likely to be strong opponents. It is perhaps unfortunate that Orwell’s language in these passages is so lively and amusing that people tend to remember these parts of the book and forget its overall message. In short Orwell plays the devil's advocate but he also gives the devil all the best tunes.

Orwell’s publisher, Victor Gollancz, was so concerned that these passages would be misinterpreted, and that the (mostly middle class) members of the Left Book Club would be upset and write to him complaining letters, that he added a foreword in which he raises some caveats about Orwell's claims in Part Two. He suggests, for instance, that Orwell may exaggerate the visceral contempt that the English middle classes hold for the working class, adding, however, that, "I may be a bad judge of the question, for I am a Jew, and passed the years of my early boyhood in a fairly close Jewish community; and, among Jews of this type, class distinctions do not exist." Other concerns Gollancz raises are that Orwell should so instinctively dismiss movements such as pacifism or feminism as incompatible with or counter-productive to the Socialist cause, and that Orwell relies too much upon a poorly defined, emotional concept of Socialism. Gollancz's claim that Orwell "does not once define what he means by Socialism" in The Road to Wigan Pier is indeed difficult to refute. The foreword does not appear in some modern editions of the book, though it was included, for instance, in Harcourt Brace Jovanovich's first American edition in the 1950s.

PART ONE

George Orwell set out to report on working class life in the bleak industrial heartlands of the West Midlands, Yorkshire and Lancashire. Orwell spent a considerable time living among the people and as such his descriptions are detailed and vivid.

Chapter One describes the life of the Brooker Family, a more wealthy example of the northern working class. They have a shop and cheap lodging house in their home. Orwell describes the old people who live in the home and their living conditions.

Chapter Two describes the life of miners and conditions down a coal mine. Orwell describes how he went down a coal mine to observe proceedings and he explains how the coal is distributed. The working conditions are very poor. This is the part of the book most often quoted.

Chapter Three describes the social situation of the average miner. Hygienic and financial conditions are discussed. Orwell explains why most miners do not actually earn as much as they are sometimes believed to.

Chapter Four describes the housing situation in the industrial north. There is a housing shortage in the region and therefore people are more likely to accept substandard housing. The housing conditions are very poor.

Chapter Five explores unemployment and Orwell explains that the unemployment statistics of the time are misleading.

Chapter Six deals with the food of the average miner and how, although they generally have enough money to buy food, most families prefer to buy something tasty to enrich their dull lives. This leads to malnutrition and physical degeneration in many families.

Chapter Seven describes the ugliness of the industrial towns in the north of England

Part Two

*GOOGLE* The Road to Wigan Pier.

Answer 3

In grass roots socialism, there would be no benefits, as everyone would bring a skill or a talent into their locality, thus strengthening that community, and would receive goods and services according to their needs.

Labour is not socialist, it is third way, and it only benefits the lazy.

One question; who is really conning you? the foreign worker who is underpaid, or the rich businessman who exploits that cheap labour in favour of you?

Answer 4

so what are you saying we should force British bosses to employ lazy slow workers that wont turn up for work on a Monday and Friday who demand more and more pay but want to work less and less.

you seem to forget that it is British bosses that are employing these migrants why do you not ask them why ?? or are you scared of there answer ??

Answer 5

There are many job vacancies.    Most (but not by any means all) of those who are not working is because they CHOOSE not to take the jobs on offer.

Answer 6

Socialist = commies.

Bring on the firing squad.

Load.  Aim.  Fire.

End of problem.

Answer 7

Socialism is tyranny---pure or not.They are simply disguised under different names.Proof?Hitler was defeated in WW2 and the same totalitarianism swept through Eastern Europe like a plague under a different name.Countless examples could be given from the past 100 years.

Answer 8

Yes!Why?They tend to vote for them!!