The anti-freedom party

The Conservative Party in dear olde Englande appears to be thoroughly rattled, and rightly so, by the rapid rise of the UK Independence Party. Unfortunately, the Conservative party's nominal media backers appear to have serious problems understanding exactly why this is happening:
The suggestion from José Manuel Barroso that Margaret Thatcher would have rejected Ukip and its arguments on Europe and immigration will likely raise a few hackles. After all, what right does the unelected head of the European Commission have to wrap himself in the cape of Lady T and claim her support for liberal immigration policies that so many of her admirers so strongly deplore?


Nor will Mr Barroso’s words go down well in Downing Street. David Cameron does not appreciate suggestions that he is dancing to Nigel Farage’s tune. Mr Barroso carefully did not name the Prime Minister when he spoke of Conservatives “surrendering” to Ukip’s arguments, but it is hard not to conclude that he had Mr Cameron in mind when he spoke.



But for all the spluttering outrage, Mr Barroso’s point is worth considering. In essence, he argues that the Conservatives are the party of free markets and free enterprise and as such, they should be standing up for the European internal market, a market predicated on the free movement of labour.

I agree. I’ve often argued here that there is a good free-market argument to be made for liberal immigration policies. The Conservatives are the party of people who “get on their bikes” and go looking for work. Why doesn’t that include Poles, Bulgarians and others who get on their proverbial bikes and go as far as Britain to find that work? If you believe in free markets for good and services, why not for labour? If competition between suppliers of guns and butter deliver more economically efficient outcomes, why not also embrace competition between suppliers of labour (IE, workers)? 
Of course, there’s a perfectly good response: this isn’t about economics, it’s about society. The economic benefits of a more liberal immigration policy are not enough to justify the social friction that comes with it.



Which is a respectable argument, but not one that many free-market Conservatives were making when the mines closed, when the print unions were broken, when council housing was sold off and utilities were privatised. In such cases, the Conservatives put the advance of the free market before the concerns of the communities immediately affected. Long-term economic gain justified short-term social pain, the party thought – and still thinks today. How many Tories now regret those reforms?
Unusually for a pro-immigration writer, this Kirkup chap actually does admit that the other side has valid arguments about the impact that unrestricted immigration has upon society.

Unfortunately, as is normal for that same group of writers, Mr. Kirkup fails to acknowledge the massive and glaring logical deficiencies in the free trade argument.

Let us start with the argument that the Tories were, and are, the party of free market economics. This is complete and arrant nonsense. The Tories were openly mercantilist for almost their entire history as a political party. They were thoroughly in favour of taxation on competitive imports. They were quite happy to use government-sponsored monopolies to force open new markets around the world. They were willing to use any means necessary to get Chinese tea and silk on favourable trade terms.

They were so dead-set against free trade, in fact, that one of the British Empire's innumerable minor wars was started in part over the Imperial stance on import and tariff regulations in the colonies.

You Americans may have heard of it- the conflict went down in history as your War of Independence.

As if the lack of historical knowledge weren't bad enough, the author then goes on to assert that as the party of free markets and free enterprise and so on and so forth ad endless nauseam, the Conservative Party should be in favour of unrestricted immigration.

This is complete tosh.

Only a political party in favour of the complete destruction of the English way of life, the very meaning of England, would support unrestricted immigration. This is the sort of magical thinking that comes from believing that individuals are all the same, all equally interested in all of the same things.

It's utter rubbish, as anyone with functioning eyes can see for himself- Muslim immigrants from Third World hellholes are not interested in assimilating into mainstream British society; Indians who come to Britain retain many of their own customs, some of which are rather noisier and more festive than the staid Brits tend to like; and Chinese and Korean immigrants tend to stick closely to their own communities, which should surprise no one but the most ardent multiculturalist.

As if all of this weren't bad enough, we now see that the EU is trying to stick Britain with a bill of damn near two billion pounds (that's roughly $3.8 billion, or about what Obamacare is supposed to save you people for 10 years) in fees to the rest of the European Commission.

The only acceptable response to such a demand would be to tell the Euzis exactly where to stick the bill. And that is initially what the Prime Minister did. It appears, however, that because of the complex rules that govern whatever it is that the Euzis call their "fiscal policy", Great Britain will have to pay something.

Any political party that works to surrender national sovereignty to a bunch of unaccountable bureaucrats in a distant land, that willingly removes any safeguards against invasion by undesirables and foreigners onto domestic shores, and that pays such vast sums of money to organisations that inflict direct economic harm on domestic interests, should be thrown out of power forthwith.

It is an absolute travesty that the so-called Conservatives, who by rights should stand for the preservation of the British way of life and society, and who should seek to create favourable economic conditions domestically through low taxes and minimal regulation, should betray their countrymen like this.

There is only one political party in the UK that is in favour of real freedom for Britain, and that is UKIP.

Comments

Popular Posts