How Privileged Urban Liberals Profit From Poverty

Remember the 90’s media icon Mother Teresa? I was young when she still enjoyed a wide media coverage, and still I can remember a shrewd saying on her career: “She liked the poor so much she wanted them to multiply.” The motto encapsulates something important about high-status caretakers. Namely, they have to justify their social existence and status with the need to take care of some “inferiors.” Were there no poor, they would be in dire need of a new fashionable cause to virtue-signal about.

Urban liberals are just like that. They love championing “the poor” or “the oppressed”—abstract people defined by their purported position in society, not by what they are. As we say in France, their heart leans Left and their wallet leans Right, which is an euphemistic way to notice the gap between their claimed values and their actual ruthless behaviour. Indeed, behind the false positivity of their self-promoting communication, urban liberals screwed the working and most middle classes, used the “poor” and “oppressed” as a pretext to expand a Big Brother governance network, and yell at billionaire Trump but not at billionaire Soros or at the Rothschilds.

When I was younger, I had the opportunity to go to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) as an exchange student. My alma mater passed a contract with the petro-monarchy, committing to create a French-speaking ancillary university there in exchange for big bucks. As I would soon discover, the attached college was to become a prized source of well-paid employments, Western teachers going there to give easier courses for higher wages.

On the material plane, I wanted for nothing, most of my expenses being covered by a scholarship agreement. The Emirati have lots of money, and they spend it lavishly on, for example, well-maintained green lawns or cypress edges in a full desert climate. Nearly all luxury companies have a retail counter there. The result is a shopping center culture, where all you have to do is stroll around neat malls with wealthy Arabs. On the bright side, the UAE are void of crime and insecurity: you can let your phone on a restaurant table, go to the bathroom, and when you come back the phone is still there. On the other side, alcohol is hard to find, the majority age of 21 is strictly enforced, and don’t even think about dating one of these Burberry silk veil-sporting girls.

The UAE are mostly an artificial country. Emirates were petty Bedouin fiefs before Anglo-American foreign diplomacy convinced them to sign an agreement, along with the powerful Saudi neighbour. When the first petrodollars started pouring in, the newly created “nation” looked like what happens when you play Sim City with cheat codes enabled: highways, six-ways avenues, skyscrapers and expensive desalination systems mushroomed out of the desert. Today, bathing on Abu Dhabi beaches still gives a front view of oil rigs, reminding the source of this seemingly fantastic, almost unlimited wealth.

Abu Dhabi in the 1950s and in 2000

Beyond its cultural want, the UAE have not only a shallow but a dark side as well. Does money build skyscrapers? Granted, money funds them, but even Bill Gates would fail to plant even one steel beam with his own hands. Actually, the brand new ultramodern Emirati metropolis have been built by millions of near-slaves for decades.

Although I did barely mingle with them, I quickly noticed their ubiquitous presence. On the supermarket, most if not all cashiers were Philippine women. On campus and office buildings, janitors were from Pakistan, Kazakhstan and other countries of the same zone. That is, poor, non-oil blessed countries. Most were Muslims, and in spite of them supposingly sharing the Emirati’s religion, they were doing all the jobs no Emirati wanted to do, worked a lot, earned almost nothing and lived in corrugated iron shacks far from the city centers. In the supermarkets, they would buy big rice packages, a bucket of oil, and nothing else.

Behind the college residence I lived in was a strip of desert some affluent people appropriated. Divided in plots, the strip already sported some nice villas, including one that featured a hedgerow of potted trees—imagine how much clean water has to be spent daily for maintaining green plants completely out of place in the desert. Unfinished villas were cared of by dozens of Paki hands: at night, the works continued, and heavy spots would shed lights on rapidly moving silhouettes.

Westerners who live in the UAE know about who gets their hands dirty. However, they pretend not to notice, simply letting the topic out of public conversations. It must be said that most upper class employments there are very well paid, and many Westerners are financially more than happy to eat at the Emirati plate. Even in our countries, lots of people and goods have been bought by petrodollars: first-rate football clubs, massive amounts of US farm land, many London Victorian houses, or the New York Chrystler Building are now owned by Gulf investment funds.

Former French prime minister Manuel Valls, a notorious sellout to both Jews and Gulf Arabs, openly rejoiced about 10 billion euros worth contracts with Saudi Arabia, hinting that this was inevitable to “save [French] economy and employments.” After the Charlie Hebdo attacks, the same man told us to “get accustomed to living with terrorism”, as if Muslims brutally murdering European civilians were a normal and somehow unavoidable phenomena. Of course, one should not get accustomed to the “far right”: the Left uses psychological conditioning to push emotional buttons as it wants, and here, we can notice how a prime seller to Gulf Arabians is also one of the terrorists’ best friends. Better white genocide and selling the country than recovering sovereignty with Marine Le Pen!

As I wondered how hypocritical the urban liberals could be—slave work is acceptable in the UAE, but Europe invaders should be granted free healthcare and welfare, just because—I started seeking for someone who would mention the dark side of Emirati “vibrant” cities, and found a series of articles on the left-leaning Guardian. This media outlet is at the heart of the system. A den of smug “social liberals”, the Guardian has an intimate relationship with the infamous George Soros and is notorious for having allowed rabid feminist Jessica Valenti to show her madness off . Still, they are almost the only mainstream media to mention the topic.

Are they powerful enough to stick their tongues at the nouveaux riches and their innumerable puppets? Well, not exactly.

On the surface, the outlet denounces the sheer exploitation and terrible working conditions of UAE imported blue collars. On a deeper level, the outlet’s point of view is limited and panders to very specific interests.

First, all pieces heavily borrow from NGO reports and praise said organizations, at such a degree that it looks like the poor workers’ conditions are a sheer pretext for urban liberal self-promotion. The fact that only some NGOs and some mainstream outlets mention the topic suggests a common agreement: poverty is but a market for professional bleeding hearts. This NGO can cover the UAE near-slaves, this other NGO can cover, say, “undocumented immigrants”, and so on, just as two companies would be allowed this and that part of the market.

Pieces authors themselves belong to the NGO they quote. The Guardian and NGOs are linked by revolving doors: all are actors of the same global governance and members of the same liberal establishment. Denunciating the poor working conditions of Paki or Kazakh workers is a sheer pretext to exist publicly and entertain a typically liberal self-satisfaction. NGO/NPO bureaucrats do not look for eliminating poverty—they are busy making a living and a show out of someone else’s poverty while getting good paychecks and a cozy job inside the System.

Second, what is exactly pointed out in the Guardian’s series? Life conditions, “exploitation”, small wages… but who is doing that? Either the outlet mentions these phenomena as if they happened on their own, with no perpetrator, or it mentions a singled-out custom, some employers, about whom it is immediately said that they are “a minority”, or unnamed enterprises.

The Guardian never denounces the Emirati managerial State, never mentions the typically Arab slavery culture and how the merciless Emirati exploitation maintains a trend that already existed centuries ago. It does not mention how near-slavery played an essential role, not only in some building sites or wealthy homes but in the whole construction of Dubai, Abu Dhabi or Riyadh. Of course, the outlet does not mention the vast passive complicity of these globalized Westerners who live in slave built air-conditioned skyscrapers.

Even when the Guardian mentions particular yards, it conveniently forgets to mention who exactly is running these. Are powerful liberals keeping by their sides stinky records to exert untold pressures—and if this is the case, on the behalf of whom exactly? Globalists’ business is definitely a Machiavellian playground.

Finally, absolutely nothing substantial is done to improve the condition of UAE near-slave workers. This would disturb Saudi and Emirati nationals, who are buddy-buddy with globalist sellouts, and cut at the root of the bleeding hearts’ means of subsistence. Everyone in the system is complicit with this. Even the pseudo-rebellious journalist will eat at the petro-monarchy plate and own a child-labour made iPhone. Speak a bit about poverty, enough for liberals to run structures that receive huge sums of money in the name of war on indigence, a bit more to mount an emotional attack on the average Westerner who does not participate into global governance network, and that’s it.

This unmentioned non-profit organization yielded huge profit for the matriarchs running it. Note the self-satisfied conclusion, completely oblivious to how most people do not benefit from such networks.

Neither the Guardian nor the self-claimed radicals actually do anything that could disturb Big Corp. For all their babble about these-poor-exploited-workers-out-there—which always fail to address the issue of crumbling Western middle classes and how whites are the first pushed aside—they never attack globalism, thus letting free rein to the very condition of the international cutthroat competition they pretend to denounce.

In all likelihood, most NGOs, NPOs, foundations, associations and other legal structures that keep working in synergy with each other objectively serve to:

  • give another platform and another career opportunity to liberals—we don’t deserve opportunities of course
  • launder money, pay less taxes
  • force upon society the Leftist narrative, together with other thousands organizations of the same type, i.e. governing society through norms and beliefs while never really threatening the global companies or banks
  • reproduce the self-serving Leftist discourse, touted as a “reference” from “experts” whereas it looks more like a dogma uphold by coordinated thugs
  • justify perpetually Left-drifting policies, as any of these organisms can push for a new pretext to be offended or another cause to support such as mandatory gay marriage, hence pushing SJWism without end or limit
  • as for the far-Left, enlarging the political market offer of the system, reaching the disgruntled or the contrarian, luring them to a pseudo-rebellious cause that is actually well tolerated and enshrined into institutions such as colleges.

Middle or average whites who venture to the colleges will be brainwashed into attacking their own race, their own class, and free entrepreneurship—but not Big Corp. If they say stay, they may get a low-paid career in fashionable media outlets or be used as cannon fodder in demonstrations whereas the privileged liberals will remain in their comfortable media-NPO-NGO-bureaucracy-BigCorp—revolving doors also open on private companies—networks. Trotskyists know well about this.

The only true opposition is the one persecuted by the establishment. Un-globalizing, dismantling both Big Corp and Big State, is the only way to free and save the drowning Westerners. This is exactly what Walmart, MacDonald’s and Wall Street do not want, and this is also why these love controlled opposition over the red pilled who are a real threat to their power.

Read Next: How The Deep State Operates

59 thoughts on “How Privileged Urban Liberals Profit From Poverty”

  1. Good article, but it went in a different direction than I expected. You don’t have to go all the way to UAE to see how privileged urban liberals profit from poverty. Go to the supermarket, where they happily support a sub-minimum “living wage” big agro-business industry that exploits illegal immigrants and fuels a brutal human trafficking operation all so that the limo-libs don’t have to pay an extra dollar per pound of oranges.
    If you want to know how they can tolerate their own cognitive dissonance, visit a polling place on election day.

      1. Wages aren’t that bad,
        Thai stepdaughter, $8 a day petrol pump attendant.
        Filipino gf, $5 a night nightclub door girl.
        Thai MiL, $14 a month state pension.

    1. Shit, it’s even more evident in the restaurants the SWPL’s enjoy so much, which totally banks on exploitative, sweat labor in sub par working conditions to belt out plates of well prepared, but usually unhealthy food to the modern dining culture denizens, who are usually progressives.

    2. Or go to your nearest inner city neighborhood about to be gentrified, like the one I grew up. True, many of these places do need a through cleaning inside and out. But these hipsters pretend to alleviate the conditions the locals live in, only to move in in droves, hike the rents, kick out your local mom and pop shops and replace them with Paneras and Whole Foods, and shun the residents out to the suburbs. Not only do they displace residents who need the affordable housing, they actually take the vibrancy out of a neighborhood and turn it into the suburbs they left behind.

  2. The Filipinos live in squalid slums in their home country, they are making plenty of money in UAE, or they wouldn’t be working there. That’s the way the 3rd world is.
    Why should they expect more?
    Why do you think it should be different?
    SJWs and Jews are concerned about changing western countries. They don’t give a flying fuck about anywhere or anyone else in the world. It’s all about controlling white Christian people.

    1. Had a few Fillipinos working for us in the ME. The fact that we didn’t beat them was enough to endear us to them.

      1. Yes, I have heard this.
        The poor filipinos get dumped on.
        I know for a fact that Koreans hate them. See them as subhuman.

        1. My BIL working in Saudi said he grew a beard to reduce (note not eliminate) the chance of getting raped by one of the host country’s nationals. The Filipinas (female) have a hard time avoiding being beaten by their female bosses and raped by their male bosses. It is a slavery based culture; if you aren’t one of us then you are a slave. They count rich or well educated westerners as one of them.

    2. “…jobs that no Emirati would do…” Funny that is what the undocumented Mexicans are here for because they do the jobs no Americans will do. The thing is, the slave labor that the Emirati is importing are ALL men, and they know their place in society; you won’t see these people at parks, malls, or at the movies with the average folks. Yet in America, you have the SJWs, White Chicks who fuck immigrants only, low tier (bad hygiene, genes, accent, etc.) H1b Indians hanging out at the malls and sitting right beside you at the movies, undocumented migrant’s kids attending the same schools as your child, etc. You get what I’m getting at. America seems to import really low tier third world migrants. You’ll see Indian people share an apartment and ram like 10 people in there and live like slobs. I mean, look at the areas in the United States that are heavily immigrant central. They look like total dumps. But apparently, we are supposed to treat them as equals. Well, I wonder why the Indians created a caste system. They knew there were upper echelon folks, and then there were low tier folks.

      1. And here in NY, in the IT depts of Wall St. firms, the Indian H1Bs are becoming managers and directors.
        And favoring their own kind when hiring contractors.
        Before Y2K this was unheard of.
        Now…I am the minority…

        1. Sure, lower cost is what brought the Indians here in the first place.
          But my point is now that they have been sponsored, gotten their green cards and have moved into management, they are favoring their own kind. Replicating like a virus.
          Are their some decent Indian guys? Of course there are. But that still does not mean it is OK for them to take jobs away from us. What would India do if the situation was reversed?

        2. I like the phrase “are there some decent Indian guys” when we give people a chance that they’re not all bad. In the meantime, ALL white males need their guilt checked and to the left, it’s impossible to be racist against a white male because white males are by definition oppressors.
          Even when most ok Indians are out there, they will not oppose racism against you from their own kind so be careful. It’s not cost that drives Indian takeovers of departments. Many of them have green cards and are not indentured servants. Management seems to love them because the Indians let them survive as collaborators. I don’t know how they live with themselves, but they do.
          In one case that ties neatly into this article, one manager went to India and was excited to tour the country and no doubt saw the children who were disfigured as a way to guilt westerners such as him into giving them money as a kind of circus act. He will experience people ripping him off for being white (charge him 5X what they would a non-white) but he’ll enjoy seeing people worse off than him and how this makes him so superior.
          He’s also a big Christian. I told him that I didn’t think his religion meant much because he doesn’t practice it outside of church. That sure shut him up.

      2. Listen racist Prick, 10 times more White Chicks date Negros here than anyone else. No wonder whites have to buy Viagra in bulk to get their mojo!

    3. It highlights the hypocrisy of the standards accepted there compared to the west.
      Their imported slave workers have no rights and work in atrocious conditions. As soon as the work is done or no longer required they are shipped back home as impoverished as when they left.
      This is in complete contrast to the gas lighting, intense lobbying and media tirade on the so called obligation for ‘wealthy’ white countries to absorb the third world and ‘diversify’ themselves into extinction.
      Jewish elites do give a flying fuck and they want all of it. Muslim, Christian, brown, white they’re all just goyim cattle. The Talmud prophecy proclaims the all conquering Jew to be rewarded with Gentile slaves and the worlds wealth.

    4. My brother in law is one of those Filipinos to which you refer. He was promised high wages but never saw much of them. Also the cost of living in those Quonset huts was high. Then a piece of equipment (vehicle mounted) went missing from a locked enclosure. The boss just charged the cost against the wages of the three guys assigned to use that equipment against their future wages. My BIL was one of those guys. He was unable to leave the country until that was paid off (they held his passport). No charges were ever laid on the theft, and no trial was required to make these workers carry the cost. We had to send him money to buy food.

    5. True, but there is no OSHA in these Saudi style countries. Unlike the PI Gov, these countries can afford to provide some kind of safe working conditions. All the while the SJWs…care nothing about….just the illegals in the US.

  3. Andre, thanks for writing this. I was expecting a much more general article, and I appreciate that instead you you shared your unique experiences and insight, and used it as a jump-off point.
    So much ink is spilled here about looking to other countries as escape hatches. It is a good reminder that at least some of us need to commit to positive change at home.

    1. I think this is going to be an OT thread.
      I hope that the Oculus Rift guy stays true to meme magic (Praise Be Upon The Kek) and keeps fighting the good fight.

      1. Taco Bell needs to jump on the shitlord supreme pronto: “All ingredients are inhumanely sourced, painstakingly picked by virtual and actual slave laborers”

        1. I’m envisioning some sort of tuna taco (that’ll turn some heads), using dolphin unsafe tuna, of course.
          The marketing campaign practically writes itself!

        2. the global wage arbitrage tuna taco- no need to “make a run for the border”, because there arent any anymore!

  4. what is fucking annoying at least here in the south is having what we call “Carlistas” (they preach Karl Marx yet they live like Carlos Slim) preaching about poverty, immigration and security.
    But most of em live in the US…

    1. Karl Marx was quite wealthy after his wife (Baroness?) inherited.
      They employed a housekeeper whom Marx shagged and impregnated.

      1. the people who have less in common with the poor are the ones that “know what’s best for them”

  5. Bravo. I almost thought this article was going off at a tangent, but it all came together, and anything that exposes the hypocrisy of the guardian and the guardian reading class – pretty much the ruling class in Britain for the twenty five years notwithstanding the current Tory government – has to be a good thing
    “NGO/NPO bureaucrats do not look for eliminating poverty—they are busy making a living and a show out of someone else’s poverty while getting good paychecks and a cozy job inside the System.”
    The article makes a lot of important observations, including about how campaigning groups and organisations (and the critique of NGOs and Foundations is going to become massive in years to come) may work to sustain the social problems they formally exist to remedy: after all campaigning groups, movements, (feminism?) charities etc., are rarely project bounded, but work to reproduce their existence and their rationale (did I mention feminism).
    I would also say that all of this potentially links in to the issue of the “managerial class” studied by James Burnham (which was a separate ROK article). The young educated progressive class rarely goes Orwell, or Simone Weil to live amongst the poor or downtrodden (though there may well be some genuinely idealistic ones who might) but will typically end up through their activity, leading them, or leading the kind of change that is deemed necessary to improve things socially. This is no different in principle to having a marxist intelligentsia leading the revolution in the name of the proletatariat. The real class division (if not yet the real class struggle) is found in the division between those who lead (the middle class educated, idealistic but often well rewarded) and those who remain needy or otherwise fit only to be led. The rewards are not always monetary (many charity / campaigning are not necessarily well paid) but involve not just virtue signalling but the accumulation of what should be understood as an important form of social capital: indeed increasingly today wealth and social capital are expected to go together: a bank today can still be evil corp but it had better be contributing to some good causes, and be seen to be doing it)
    The result is that many educated middle class people who are politically and socially oriented towards good and progressive causes are actually sponging off causes they support: as in the cartoon about the anti-homelessness blogger they enjoy rich benefits in the form of social capital while very little changes for those who are theoretically the objects of their concern.

    1. I took it as an example of the groups in question ‘talking out of both sides of their mouth’. Supporting higher taxes for everyone else, but doing what they can to operate in a space where they themselves might be immune from taxation. It’s not paying less taxes in itself, it’s the hypocrisy.

    2. Those who avoid taxes through financial arrangements and using NGOs/NPOs as an upfront let the burden of taxation slip on the shoulders of the (shrinking) middle classes. When the guy who makes $4.000 per month pays a higher proportion of taxes than the guy who makes $40.000, and receives nothing in return, whereas the integrated globalist will earn favours for participating in a tax-escaping scheme, you can see that there is a problem.

      1. In what country are we talking about though? In my country Sweden you pay more taxes the more you make. “Progressive” taxation like that is quite common in the west.

        1. The loopholes protect or shelter a ton of the very wealthy’s money against taxation. Most very rich, as in billionaires, pay less than 15% taxes on what they make in a year. Of course, almost none of it is earned income. For some reason, gee I don’t know, the tax code was written in a way that shifts most of the burden onto wage earners(progressively) while practically eliminating taxation of the ownership class.

  6. Good article, but a slight correction I’d make: the Sykes Picot agreement did plenty to fuck the Middle East. America and the U.K. have done a lot of bad, but don’t think your own country is innocent .

    1. Indeed. Sykes-Picot could be considered the last attempt by the Europeans to do a bit of colonialism.

  7. Your article was music to my ears! Ever drifting SJW’ism, leftism without limits. I realized today interacting with someone I know who is gay, and someone else I know (a girl) talking about someone they know who is gay, that it is not ENOUGH in this day and age to just be gay-tolerant, oh no, you must be PRO-gay, pro-actively supporting everything they want, if you are neutral or slightly negative, well, that just doesn’t cut it in 2017! perpetually Left-drifting policies If anyone else wants to here some common bloody sense listen to this

  8. The tittle alone is already a great and thought provoking question
    I read that and smiled because I knew exactly what that meant
    They gain attention due to others suffering. They don’t really care and if anything wouldn’t mind if others remain in poverty. It helps build their brand up and become the same system they claim to be fighting
    “Animal Farm” in 2017

    1. Replace fuck with violent rape and you have it right. And note the maids are foreigners always and sometimes non-Muslims. Of course if they aren’t Muslims than the Quran is approving of those rapes.

  9. Brilliant article. Exactly this topic I and two of my close, well-educated and somewhat red pilled friends talked about yesterday. Dubai in particular.

  10. The red pill is so fucking painful to swallow sometimes it makes me depressed and want to get a gun and blow my brains out.

  11. Completely forgot to include the following:
    300 years of slavery, Inquisition of natives and pagans in America and colonization by White Christian Empires.
    UAE is just a small country and won’t last another 20 years with the current prize of oil and wars.

    1. Off-topic. If you want to consider ancient slavery though, click on the link about the Arab slavery culture. Arabs were kidnapping blacks in Africa before any the first white man set floor there.

  12. “The only true opposition is the one persecuted by the establishment.
    Un-globalizing, dismantling both Big Corp and Big State, is the only way
    to free and save the drowning Westerners” – no, it is not “the only way”. We need to work from below at least as hard – if not harder, to implement our values and beliefs on micro – level and take over the whole society. In short – we need skilfull metapolitics.
    No lasting change without that.

  13. I used to like the Guardian. I am glad you singled them out, as they manage to be the biggest leftist hypocrites.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *