The 'Left' a dissapearing phenomenon?

There has been an interesting debate on Revleft, concerning the sad state of the ‘left’ in British politics, equally you could add the poor showing of the ‘right’ (but of course they wouldn’t).
There has, over the course of this debate, been many varied opinions as adherents of different ‘leftist’ ideologies blame their failure on each other (something they excel at). But at no time do they admit the increasing irrelevance of their arguments to today’s changing society, rather they would blame the ‘lefts’ loss of control over the working-class on the racism endemic amongst the working-class.

When one poster posts ironically; “Yeah because every worker that votes BNP is a racist....”
Another replies; “That pretty much sums it up. Or do you think they voted BNP because they're stupid and didn't realise, despite this being a well known fact in the UK, that the BNP are a racist party?”
They do not see (or choose not to see, which is more likely) that British workers voted BNP since they are primarilly concerned with their jobs, as opposed to the lefts love affair with internationalism and the fabled ‘stateless society’. When faced with losing their jobs, seeing their families homeless and struggling to survive in a society that doesn’t care, can you really fail to see why they voted BNP, and why the BNP then made a terrible faux pas by turning away from the worker to the middle-classes (usual with British Nationalism). Are the workers of Britain, or any other country, racist then for placing the needs of their families and friends before others whom they have never met, let alone exploited? The ‘left’ needs to step carefully, after all you can kick a puppy only so often before it turns and bites your ass.

The ‘left’, through its adherence to an outdated idea of internationalism, has backed itself into a corner, in a society which is fast becoming more and more ethno-centric, more and more concerned with national issues, which is finding it harder and harder to comprehend the ‘internationalist’ message that the ‘left’ is still promoting; can hardly assume the title of champions of the working-class while pursuing policies that would see the British worker replaced by an immigrant work force, whose only connection to the ethnic workers is that they are workers as well.
And that explains the continuing marginalisation of the left in Britain (if not the western world) the irrelevancy of an outdated system. They take comfort under the assumption that they represent the ‘New-Left’, instead they are merely replaying the tired old message of the ‘liberal-left’. They call themselves revolutionaries, but what revolution simply regurgitates the past?

It's amazing that just because a person votes on the BNP, is already considered a "racist". Do those left parties stop and wonder that maybe people want to protect their jobs and their standards of living against the wave of cheap imigrant labour with wich the capitalist system baths our societies relentlessly?

I suppose the communist party in Portugal for example is smarter than the ones in the UK, because they have now adopted a "patriotic" stance to try to keep being the "workers voice" within the political spectrum. But even this patriotic stance alienates our revleft comrades, so many of them are still not prepared to see that the "internationalism" is now a weapon of the reactionary powers against the precariat.

It's difficult for the left to see that nationalism isn't elitist, racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-fat, Social Darwinism, Satanic, etc. Their worldview of 'tolerance' includes the super-happy-fun-everybody-wins-club, or fascism, without middleground.

The connection between morality and internationalism is a fabrication of government and commerce. There is little logic present in the left when you bring people into the forefront.

If such stupidity is disappearing, it's certainly positive. Would anybody care to disagree?

If the left does begin "disappearing" this could create a vacuum which we could attempt to fill. More and more leftists would become disillusioned with what their leftist ideologue masters are constantly telling them to believe, and after they start seeing their masters are wrong, we could try and get the RSF to fill the niche.

The problem with these so-called "leftists"—and I use that term very loosely (considering the fact that most of the members of RevLeft would be a viewed as complete disgrace to most of the prominent individuals who claimed to be on the far left historically)—is that they're not even knowledgeable Marxists. A real Marxist would understand capitalist dynamics and why an ever expanding reserve army of labor (as is the case with immigration) is absolutely detrimental to the material interests of the national proletariat. More people competing in the labor market inevitably drives down wages; a sizable portion of the population living in poverty disciplines labor into obeying even the most horrid conditions demanded by capital. The British proletariat isn't stupid, they realize the negative effects immigration has been having on their class (both economically and socially) quite well. Self-proclaimed "revolutionary" college students, who haven't worked a day in their lives and whose families live in relative luxury (which probably represents close to 80% of RevLeft's membership) haven't had to live in neighborhoods where immigrants have taken over, or compete for jobs against people willing to work for below the minimum wage. They're so blinded by their naive conviction in the necessity and validity of internationalism that they overlook the obvious incompatibility of multiculturalism with socialism, and (more importantly), how encouraging immigration simply advances bourgeois interests.

I'm of the opinion that anyone who's actively involved in encouraging immigration should be viewed as a counter-revolutionary and treated accordingly. The working-class is justifiably sick and tired of listening to overly idealistic intellectuals preaching about the 'beauty' there is in empathizing with the plight of the Ugandan proletariat, or what have you. As you said, the European proletariat are thinking about the well being of their friends and families, not what's going on in a distant land to people who wouldn't even care about them anyway. Internationalism, of the sort most "leftists" endorse, is an unattainable myth that needs to be exorcised from the movement if we ever hope to achieve anything.

Internationalism, by its very nature, cannot sustain socialism, as socialism necessitates the cooperation of autonomous social groups. It is difficult enough to orchestrate a revolutionary socialist movement without incorporating the aimlessness of internationalist ideologues. These "leftists" have become bogged down in the mire of idealistic vagaries rather than directing their efforts toward developing cogent solutions to the problems facing our nation states; instead, they concentrate upon our purported international "brotherhood" as united workers. What a joke. These short-sighted buffoons believe themselves to be actual saviors, but in reality they are nothing more than marginalized bourgeois brats with no genuine revolutionary tendencies. It should surprise no one, then, that left-wing movements have long lost favor with the national working classes of the world. International cooperation is desirable; internationalism is a malignant cancer.

I agree that internationalists should be branded as counter-revolutionaries.

Indeed, it is the neo-Utopian disregard (and often complete disdain) for the very notion of national solidarity that has effectively prevented revolutionary socialism from gaining any serious momentum in the contemporary West. The bourgeois parties know when and how to exploit various dimensions of nationalism to their advantage. Consequently, they will always have a significant edge over their internationalist counterparts —especially as the character of the West continues to diversify itself.

Western socialism will simply have to adapt itself to these basic facts if it is to ever become a viable political force at this point in history. Hopefully, political organizations like the RSF can help to establish the necessary foundation for this development. That being said, it's naive to think that most of the existing 'socialist' organizations will make the sort of philosophical concessions necessary to take them out of the realm of utopia. The only solution is to establish parallel organizations that dispense with such dogmatic redundancies, whilst maintaining the same commitments to the international revolution against capitalism and the fulfillment of socialism.