Professor Budil on Migration: Elites’ Quest for a Global Proletariat

Many places on the planet are becoming war zones – this in turn forces people to economic migration, war migration, even climate migration. There are millions of people of completely different cultures in Sweden. “Human history is also a history of migration. Sometimes it is also basically a migration of some elite, for example nomads, who, for example, move from Central Asian countries to India, the Mediterranean and the like. There she dominated the local population and eventually merged with them. That’s like the spread of Indo-Europeans several thousand years ago, sometimes it’s really a more massive movement, but it was usually longer-term in the past,” Budil mentioned, for example, the migration of the Neolithic, the migration of the first farmers from Anatolia to Europe, or to India, lasted thousands and thousands of years. “It was really step by step,” he added.

“Since the eighteenth, especially the nineteenth century, thanks to infrastructure, thanks to the industrial revolution, thanks to the railway, thanks to regular steamships, today to other means of transport, of course migration has become easier. Fifty million people left Europe in the nineteenth century. Which is an unprecedented world migration that would not have been possible in the seventeenth or sixteenth century. Which is the result of the industrial revolution,” added Budil.

He also talked about Sweden, which we currently perceive as a rich country. “It was poor in the 19th century. In the 1860s, northern, central Sweden was ravaged by famine. Swedes were leaving Sweden en masse, around 1900 every fifth Swede lived in the United States of America,” noted Budil.

“Migration is something that is natural in history. What must be reckoned with is that at the same time from the 18th and 19th In the 19th century, nation-states are created in which there is a certain political system, usually more or less tending towards a certain democracy, that is to say, an effort to get the participation of the largest possible number of people. The French Revolution, the further development of other European countries postulated that it is the nation that simply rules and needs adequate political representation for that. However, in order for the nation to function as a whole, to rule well, to manage the country better than the other monarchs before, it obviously needs a certain degree of homogeneity,” he added. “That means he needs to share certain values, a certain worldview and so on. Every state should consider this, especially those that are declining demographically, whether it is somehow able to accommodate the new arrivals, the new migrants that it sometimes needs due to its demographic stagnation, whether it is able to fully integrate them into a politically functioning whole. To make them equal, full-fledged, beneficial members of the nation state. I am afraid that this is exactly what is failing badly in Sweden. And unfortunately, in a large part of the Western world, this is failing,” added Budil.

“Something like apartheid is emerging. In principle, it is somewhat reminiscent of the situation in the USA at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. century, when excessive migration, but at the same time the fact that the Anglo-Saxon elite shielded themselves a little from those immigrants from Eastern and Central Europe, coined an acronym for them. For them, America began to divide into certain groups that did not communicate with each other, that spoke their own language and so on,” Budil added to the risks of migration. “It can really result in such mutual alienation, in apartheid, at best with a human face, that the communities are kind of ignored. But it can also lead to certain hostility and conflict. We live in a world, or in the Western world, when somehow the productive model of capitalism, as it arose in the 19th century, when basically the purpose of the economic life at that time was to create an industry, an educated nation, as homogeneous as possible, because that also somehow benefited trade, production and so on. So this industrial productive model of capitalism is beginning to be replaced, or in some places already completely replaced, by financial capitalism, where, basically, capital flows from the productive sphere into the purely speculative sphere and the various shares and share buybacks that are unproductive. But on the other hand, they are a source of wealth. They are the source of wealth, a certain limited and increasingly limited oligarchic class, so that the situation is starting to resemble actually the feudal world before the French Revolution, when a narrow aristocratic class ruled, on which the rest of the people depended, because they owned the land and either kept them on that land, or she rented the land to them, so they were dependent on her. And now we are basically facing a world that is controlled by a certain small global oligarchy, which basically keeps the rest of the population – the middle class, which is falling lower and lower – in a kind of debt servitude, lifelong mortgages, leases, the inability to buy housing and the like,” said Budil, that it is a slightly upgraded feudalism in the conditions of 21st century civilization. “And it began to dissolve our nations. In principle, in this world, the existence of nations, as in the world of feudalism, is in principle not necessary. We have a transnational feudal layer here, just as the aristocracy was transnational in the Middle Ages and early modern times, and then the serfs,” added Budil.

“In the great waves of migration that are taking place in the Western world, I see almost an attempt by the new global hierarchy to assimilate the proletariat. He actually created a double proletariat. One proletariat with a slightly higher standard of living, the privileged one, who still lives in Western countries, or in North America, who enjoyed a long high standard of living, the American way, three children, etc., but his standard of living stagnates. And it becomes a real proletariat, only over time it needs to be deprived of those original privileges. Then the proletariat was non-European, in Bangladesh, in India, in Indonesia, until recently in China and the like, where the cheapest production, later all production, was moved, and it worked for low wages from the beginning. And that migration is starting to mix these two proletariats. Unfortunately, the European proletariat still does not understand this and is fertile ground for various xenophobia and the like,” said Budil.

And how to change the world now? “It would be optimal if the United States, like Spain, France, Portugal, and most recently Great Britain, simply understood that they can no longer be a world power and, frankly, that it’s not even worth it,” added Budil.

Add PL to your favorite feeds on Google News. Thank you