In this second part on the demonisation of the working class refuting Jordan Theresa, she continues her flawed argument against individualism without fully comprehending what it means and mentions about new Labour neglecting the working class and how the BNP took advantage of this. What Jordan Theresa fails to comprehend is that all the good intentions voters have and what they wish for is all pie in the sky, it's all well believing in greater representation in parliament from socialists, but economic reality will never permit them for what they believe in, which is why the Labour Party are damned if they do and damned if they don't, there is no way out for them; they either move more in the direction of socialism to appease the left and destroy the economy leading to riots, cling onto the mixed economy which is already causing disruption as they claim they are neglectful, or give up on socialism and face more riots. Socialists don't understand economics, if they did, they would understand why the likes of Tony Blaire were never going to be like that of old Labour prior to Margaret Thatcher. Whilst I can agree to a certain extent with the message Jordan Theresa makes regarding the demonisation of the working class, she doesn't understand that her own socialism is the cause of such unemployment problems, etc and this is where the problem lies with her argument, she seems to believe that socialism is the solution to her problems, when, in real fact, socialism is the cause of the problems in working-class communities. The solution is the free market, but we've already established the fact they oppose capitalism. *Follow Me on Social Media:* • Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/LibertarianViewsScottyM • Parler: https://parler.com/profile/LibertarianViewsScottyM/posts — @LibertarianViewsScottyM • Gab: https://gab.com/LibertarianScot • Minds: https://www.minds.com/LibertarianScot/ • MeWe: https://mewe.com/i/scottmckelvie • WordPress Blog: https://libertarianviewswithscottym.wordpress.com/ • LBRY/Odysee: https://odysee.com/@LibertarianViewsScottyM:6 • Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-390494 • BitChute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/egfCIS1DbaBM/ *You can also support me here on Patreon:* https://www.patreon.com/creator-home ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPbuVoKsnGE

In this video on the truth about capitalism: Non Compete Debunked, I covered his argument on the competition in the workplace. As I previously mentioned in part 4 we do not live under a free market economy, therefore, what is to blame for the lack of employment opportunity in ratio to demand for employment is to blame on governments interference in the economy. Again, Non Compete uses the argument about automation, but as previously mentioned in part 4, it is a myth to state that automation resulted in a reduction in employment. As Henry Hazlitt points out: _"New stocking frames as they were introduced were destroyed by the handicraft workmen (over 1,000 in a single riot), houses were burned, the inventors were threatened and obliged to fly for their lives, and order was not finally restored until the military had been called out and the leading rioters had been either transported or hanged._ _"Now it is important to bear in mind that insofar as the rioters were thinking of their own immediate or even longer futures their opposition to the machine was rational. For William Felkin, in his History of the Machine-Wrought Hosiery Manufactures (1867), tells us that the larger part of the 50,000 English stocking knitters and their families did not fully emerge from the hunger and misery entailed by the introduction of the machine for the next forty years. But insofar as the rioters believed, as most of them undoubtedly did, that the machine was permanently displacing men, they were mistaken, for before the end of the nineteenth century the stocking industry was employing at least a hundred men for every man it employed at the beginning of the century."_ No different to the myth that as productivity increased and profits for the capitalist increased, he erroneously claims that workers wages decreased, which is the complete opposite to that of the truth. It may seem reasonable to speak about the competition in the workplace being a problem, but competition is what strives businesses to improve, most importantly, conflict in the workplace in today's market is to blame on corporatism, not capitalism. Something I forgot to mention in this video and important to note; it is NOT the capitalist that determines what gets produced, it is the consumer through consumer demand. As mentioned, the capitalist may give orders of what he wants done with his own business regarding production, more often than not the employees are left freely to their own creativity. The capitalist would not have hired the highly-skilled individual for such things otherwise. The thing that contradicts Non Compete debunked on his argument is that the very slave labour system he complains about is the natural state of where socialism will always lead and always has led. As I've mention ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyKm-DgKjAI