Share |

Saturday, 26 March 2011

The TUC march against Cuts: why not against Globalisation?

An estimated 100,000 people are said to be heading to London today to participate in a TUC-organised protest against government spending cuts. Of course, there is a justifiable and palpable sense of anger at the axing of jobs and public services, but I wonder, how many of those people taking to the streets today actually comprehend what lies at the root of the cuts and the economic crisis that has brought them about? I am of course, referring to globalisation. Given that the TUC and the last government (as well as the current one of course) are vigorous advocates and enablers of this process, this protest is utterly misdirected and quixotic. If those who march today genuinely wish to defend public services and jobs, they should be marching against globalisation.

Whereas the BBC and other media outlets invariably highlight the expense arising from the policing of EDL demonstrations, there is no such mention of the costs of deploying 4,500 police in London today.

Disgracefully, one of the unprincipled architects of our current economic plight – Ed Miliband – will be attending the march, despite the fact that he has no alternative suggestions to remedy the budget deficit or our economic malaise. His profligate globalising policies would only serve to hasten our terminal decline. According to the BBC, Miliband yesterday stated
‘that “the voices of the mainstream majority” would be making themselves heard.’

“I think the government will be making a great mistake if they somehow dismiss all of the people on that march as troublemakers or just ‘the same old people’. They are not.” '
If you took part in this march today, please wake up to the fact that what you are doing will count for absolutely nothing if you do not actively oppose globalisation and instead seek to defend our national interests and national sovereignty.


  1. I'm always struck by the parochialism of these people and the narrowness of their horizons. It's as if they think they're living in the times where the economic levers the government could pull actually worked. They don't any more. Individual nation-states are hopelessly weak in the face of a globalised economic crisis. For my part, I think the one thing that might actually help is a popular pan-European movement of people opposed to the destruction of their countries and the hollowing out of their economies. Ideally, since capital is now exterritorial, a worldwide movement would be the ticket but realistically European nations have a lot to gain from this form of political action. call it an anti-globalist version of the EU if you like. A 'pro-Europe' EU if you can imagine such a thing!

  2. An interesting suggestion Thomas. A loose European union of sovereign nation-states defending indigenous interests and preserving and promoting national and regional cultures, whilst co-operating in those economic endeavours where the nation-state struggles to provide a viable base for R&D and investment (aerospace, for example) would theoretically not be a bad thing. However, how could such a democratised, pro-indigenous loose grouping of states be created?

    The EU as it is today is certainly a threat to all European peoples and thus has to be dismantled. A European nationalist international would seem to be the answer, but we need nationalist parties to hold the balance of power in each EU state to bring about such an eventuality, which is a tall order indeed.

  3. It all hinges on the direction economic globalisation is about to take: (i) deepening and intensifying or (ii) sliding into reverse. It is around this that political strategies need to be built.

    Admittedly I was going by the first scenario in my earlier comment, and the notion that seemingly disparate people are often required to unite in the face of a greater external threat - namely the 'rule by markets' that globalisation entails. Globalisation has affected Western European countries in fairly similar ways. For example, despite the blame often ascribed to Thatcher by leftists, most developed European countries have seen their unemployment levels rocket from less than 2% to around 8-10% when, at the same time, their GDPs have more than doubled. This problem has never been satisfactorily resolved and has left us with a permanent underclass of subsidised indigents - and attendant social pathologies.

    The real paradox is that a fragmented political landscape suits the economic globalists down to the ground - and this would a terrible situation to find ourselves in should scenario 1 come about. If economic globalisation continues to trash our economies it would follow that we will have no choice but to fight fire with fire and introduce some kind of supra-national political counterweight to protect Europe's (and hence England's) interests. I agree that it's difficult to square this with nationalism, and any kind of multinational action like this would only be palatable if temporary as most of us would flinch at permanent consolidation of power at Europe-level.

    On the bright side if, as i hope, economic globalisation has reached a terminal point and begins 'unspooling', then it may be that the world starts to become a more sane place once again and states may get back some of ability to influence their economic futures. The only way I can see this happening is if some external 'shock' like an energy crisis supervenes.

    Apologies for the long and discursive post!


Comments that call for or threaten violence will not be published. Anyone is entitled to criticise the arguments presented here, or to highlight what they believe to be factual error(s); ad hominem attacks do not constitute comment or debate. Although at times others' points of view may be exasperating, please attempt to be civil in your responses. If you wish to communicate with me confidentially, please preface your comment with "Not for publication". This is why all comments are moderated.