Why the Left Despises Skilled Labor

The left has run a successful campaign to interfere with the lives and businesses that employ skilled labor for centuries now.

One of the chief methods by which it has accomplished this is by expropriating children from their families, interfering with the traditional system of apprenticeship, making family businesses run on residential property illegal, and by mandating a universal system of education which churns out a mixture of half-capable proles and indolent Brahmins with expensive educations to act as pliable bosses.

Marxism and its offshoots has been the typical method for the left to co-opt skilled labor by encouraging them to organize into protection rackets, often run by political operatives, and paid for out of the wages of skilled laborers who have been hoodwinked into believing emotive gibberish about solidarity. If you still believe in ‘solidarity,’ I invite you to visit the American cities of:

  • Detroit, MI
  • Bethlehem, PA
  • Flint, MI
  • Cleveland, OH
  • Buffalo, NY
  • Rochester, NY
  • Syracuse, NY
  • Camden, NJ

…And any other ‘rust belt’  or former ’empire state’ city that you can think of. Shout “Solidarity!” inside of a ruined factory in the Great Lakes region. Perhaps the ghost of a union man will holler back at you.

The reason why the left desires to co-opt and destroy workers who actually know what they’re doing is because their very capability is a threat to the notion of egalitarianism. The notion that a man needs to work at a trade for years before he becomes capable to practice it on his own explicitly devalues formal education.

As every unionized American industry in the 20th century has become an economic pit of failure, the left has switched to organizing cartels of government workers who are protected from competition by marginally competent gunmen. Additionally, they’ve attempted to shake down idiot-proles working in unskilled positions. None of these methods will work out for the left long term, because the workers that they suck the blood out of are going to wind up the same way as  all the workers that they ‘helped’ during the 20th century.

The American software industry, and the broader less-regulated technology industry, is one of the last remnants of high-paid skilled labor remaining in the United States. The workers as individuals and as groups have been under daily assault by the Red press. Red professors, Red feminists, and traitorous workers hoping to curry favor with Red political operators have joined in on attacking the remaining companies that skirt the Federal law (scribbled by Reds, passed by Reds waving American flags) to maintain high hiring standards.

Why else does the left hate skilled workers?

  • The idea of skilled labor puts Managerial Brahmins at a disadvantage. They can’t understand and don’t like a business that takes specialized knowledge to run.
  • Skilled workers make lots of money. The left wants to steal as much of it as they can to pay off their vast hordes of hungry morons with a political grudge.
  • Skilled labor is unfriendly to women who are unwilling to sacrifice their ability to have and care for children and to compete in a harsh professional environment.
  • Skilled labor is typically only accessible to people who are of above-average intelligence and discipline. Deficiencies in either can be rectified by surfeits of either, but both can’t be lacking.

The left is typically too busy to care about the interests of skilled labor. Skilled workers are often interested in advancing to political positions (‘making the leap to management’), which also gives them a tendency to either defect against the interests of their brothers, or to be politically anodyne so as not to harm their chances of advancement.

Professional conservative political operatives tend to be completely indifferent to the interests of skilled workers. Part of this is because most American conservatives are just gelded outer party members who exist to act as political buffers for their superiors in the professional Left. The other reason is that Managerialists with a fundamentally leftist perspective on the human species tend to fund the major conservative foundations.

This is one of the reasons why both parties tend to do whatever they can to flood the labor market with foreigners, and do nothing to dismantle the inherently anti-skill mentality of the modern bureaucratic state. Milquetoast psuedocaptains of industry will murmur about ‘meritocracy’ out of the sides of their mouths without explaining what they really mean.

Perhaps this is because they remember what happened to William Shockley, the inventor of the transistor, when he spoke out against the tyrannical leveling labor legislation that continues to ruin America to this day. His example shows that a position at Stanford and a record as an ingenious scientist and businessman are not enough to protect you from the long knives of the Left. The public firing and mass-libel of Brenden Eich occurred for far less.

What should rightists do to defend the interests of skilled workers? Unfortunately, there’s not much that can really be achieved at this stage other than to staunch the bleeding by informing skilled workers who may be dazed by the daily attacks on their professions and companies (and by extent, their livelihoods, their families, and their property) by the bloodthirsty Red press.

Every day, disgusting propagandists at failing companies like the New York Times collectively lick their fangs, publishing libelous hit pieces against the culture of skilled workers, particularly in software engineering. The workers themselves tend to be unwilling to take sides, because they know that making a public stand could result in them losing their career, by extent harming their wives and children should they have them.

The trouble with these methods is that an economic model that rests on forcing people to become pliant morons to be manipulated ‘scientifically’  and within a wise program of ‘regulation’ by clueless Harvard graduates is that it is not a globally competitive one. It was never a terribly good idea, but Washington Experts will cling to it until the end.

In history, the difference between incompetent government and competent government is the one between annihilation and independence.

If it will remain possible to maintain advanced civilization on this continent, skilled workers are going to need to cut those guys out of the arrangement. They’re going to need to say “no” to reducing hiring standards, to accepting pay cuts to hire incompetents for political purposes, and to the notion of taking orders from wretched leftists who want nothing more than to suck their betters dry, to leave their cities in ruins, and their families destroyed.

The typical response of a skilled worker to this political assault is to wonder to themselves what they have to say to make it all go away.

The only accurate answer is “Nothing, because they will never stop until they have taken everything that you have and crushed everything that you care about.”

The critical weakness of the destroyers is that they can’t achieve what they want if there is resistance, whether active or passive. And to resist, there needs to be awareness of what must be resisted, how, and where.

The Right should also realize that it will never get anywhere by sucking the toes of eccentric magnates looking to buy Republican politicians because they’re for sale at a cheaper price than Democrats are. It is also an enormous waste of resources to beg for votes within a political structure that systematically operates against the interests of the Right.

Instead, the focus should be on the capable people who keep the trains running, the servers from failing, the crude oil pumping, the power running, and the lights staying on. It is those people who are being denigrated, dishonored, and terrorized on a daily basis by the political scribblers who have never worked a day of real work in their entire lives, with a head full of crass sarcasm which conceals a murderous agenda.

Liked it? Take a second to support Social Matter on Patreon!
View All

12 Comments

  1. Thank you for the thought-provoking article. My own take on why they import cheap non-european labor is because 1) they can and, 2) this deconstructs the culture. Maybe you are saying this also.

  2. I just wanted to say I think every article you guys put together on this blog/magazine is brilliant. Really well thought out, comprehensive articles that rarely leave me wondering with unanswered questions. Well done.

    My only contribution to this article is on the part where the author referring to women’s refusal to put aside childbirth for technical roles. I think the reason why women aren’t in technical roles is more likely that women don’t have the aptitude for technical mastery that men have. This is most obvious in just about any physical activity, from archery to military matters, but not only physical things. Women genuinely don’t have the fanatical obsession with seemingly trivial details of, say, the complexities of designing a highly integrated digital circuit, the mathematics involved and the rules around digital design. It’s probably fair to say most normal people don’t have the level of autism required to master highly specialized technical skills, but women very, very rarely have that fanaticism. Plenty of women work in such industries but usually gravitate towards management, administration, or documentation.

    If what I’m saying wasn’t true, then there would be countless examples of women throughout history who have become warriors and fought alongside or defeated male warriors. But the left have precious few of those stories and even then the stories are likely embellished mystical folk lore. Smart women now, and then, mastered understanding the best male technicians and warriors, and enjoyed a resultant comfortable lifestyle, safe with all the peace and prosperity that male technical mastery brings.

    1. I agree with you. I left that out of this because it’s targeted to fence-sitters who might not yet be indoctrinated by our mind control waves.

    2. You, sir, have a sexist point of view in the matter. The main reason why women do not prosper on technical and scientific fields is, and always will be that the verge of the peak of their career merges with the peak of the best or last possibilities to give birth. Why they get stuck in middle management and office jobs in the west is due to the cultural molding – women are given pretty role models while men are being taught how to fight, lead and think of innovations. Girls who have interests in some more skill requiring fields are demeaned since early on. (Not even discussing the “bossy” label)

      I live in a country where skills and workmanship have not been killed in the people and are highly valued by most companies and the society in general. By my observation, I can tell women are no less capable than men – in several cases even more, but this is not a point I’m making. I attend an engineering school and despite it is more popular among men, the women who do study these fields are bright and devoted.
      Why men are more often on the technical fields is simple – women focus more often on more everyday fields that are more tangible – consider the local popularity in handicraft, something that requires high skills – or more focused on communication and humanities, something that could be done, too, while raising a kid. A real example from my uni: the most tangible field, technical design and technology of apparel (“engineering of clothes”) is ueber-popular among women(95%).

      All in all, don’t believe that gender defines the mind and capabilities of a person. Look more towards what the society is telling us and our children to see why some things have the specific trends. I find that we, people, men and women should respect, understand and support each other instead of digging in old dogmas.

      1. “All in all, don’t believe that gender defines the mind and capabilities of a person.”

        This is a good example of the blank slate fallacy. For a good example of how sex defines the capabilities of a person, see below:

      2. I don’t mean to gang up on you, because Hadley already responded.

        I would just like to encourage you to consider that these differences in interests may have an intrinsic reason not entirely related to culture. It’s true that women have long had an aptitude for handicraft and a knack for skilled labor involving clothing.

        It would be hard to establish your argument that women are not encouraged to be leaders while men tend to be denigrated within academia. The women in your engineering school first self-selected to attend, and then your school selected from among the applicants to pick whom they thought were most qualified.

  3. Excellent writing and article, again! Mr. Dampier finds succinct, relevant, and timely examples to highlight his points. One of the best essayists I have read in years- thanks to this website, and this author for publishing his work! I liked the comment about “autistic” behavior of the technical classes. I have known great mechanical engineers, and was, IMHO, a truly good technician of electrical and mechanical equipment- it IS nearly a trance-like and ?autistic ability to “see” the complexities and workings of machineries and controls in such a way as to work solutions and create new ways of doing things… yes, the marxists have ruined our society. I had to babysit “apprentice” women in the trades. The only they were good for was a BJ on the way to their promotions somewhere else to get them out of our way.

  4. The observation that skilled labor puts the lie to the idea that formal education as a panacea is extremely important. After all, university professors are an example of extremely skilled labor, but they as a class are largely immune to Leftist criticism. If contemporary Leftism were not the ideology of the intellectuals in their bid for power, the prevalence of Leftism among university instructors would be baffling: after all, some people aren’t cut out to be theoretical physicists, and it doesn’t matter how many times you make certain people recite “qui, quae, quod…,” they’re not going to understand Latin grammar. Opposition to skilled labor only applies to non-intellectuals or non-Leftists more generally. If a skilled sector serves the purposes of the intellectuals, such as nursing, then it will be tolerated and even supported; otherwise, it must be crushed.

    1. >If a skilled sector serves the purposes of the intellectuals, such as nursing, then it will be tolerated and even supported; otherwise, it must be crushed.

      This is what’s happening with software, but it actually happened with nuclear power in the US long before, and countless other industries. I want to broaden the discussion past software, because that’s already been retread too many times by both us and by the leftist press.

  5. Great piece. Roughly equal parts Jim Kunstler and Pat Buchanan. I dig it.

Comments are closed.