Here is Brendan O’Neil’s sharp eyed, and tongued let it be said, take on the Cait Reilly case, in which Ms Reilly and her space-cadet Leftie supporters have referred to Workfare and similar back to work schemes as ‘slave labour’.
“Who else but an ill-read infant, utterly lacking in historical nous and self-awareness, would describe something like Workfare as “slavery”, or being paid a small amount of money by the state to work in Poundland as “forced labour”? Comparing oneself to the beaten and manacled cotton-pickers of yesteryear is the stuff of Kevin the Teenager more than Karl Marx, bringing to mind that spotty overgrown teen’s cry of: “Everyone hates me!”
The infantilism of Cait and Co. can also be seen in the underlying aim of their campaigning – to have the state sustain all young adults who fall on tough times; to have the authorities feed, water, clothe and care for every graduate or school-leaver who doesn’t immediately land a plush job and cheap digs. There is nothing remotely radical, nothing Rosa Luxemburgish about this demand. It is in essence a campaign to extend teenage dependency into adult life, where the state takes over the role of parents in being expected to satiate young folks’ needs and stroke their self-esteem. How hilarious that the Cait cheerleaders talk about “slavery” while metaphorically manacling themselves to the state.”
Telling it like it is, Mr O’Neill. The ironic thing about the whole case is that because Ms Reilly has been seen by so many as a spoiled brat with an overwhelming sense of self-entitlement, probably the only job she will have is the one offered to her by Morrisons. Would you employ such a self important whinger? I wouldn’t.