Making women wage slaves suits everyone well – except women and children, of course

HOW bizarre that the keystone of a supposedly conservative budget is a plan to help women abandon their children and go out to work. Antifamily socialists and dogmatic hard-line feminists – often the same people – have long sought to turn women into wage-slaves.

The old Communist East Germany managed to cram 90 per cent of its women into factories and offices in the 1980s, and counted it a great triumph. Some modern feminists admire this to this day.

For them, the only good life is the life of paid work. The only ‘working women’ are those who work outside the home. The huge, responsible, future-defining task of raising the next generation as good women and men is dismissed as servitude, and farmed out to paid strangers.

Big business has felt the same way, seeing the new untapped female workforce as much preferable to the old male working class, most of which was chucked on the national scrapheap during the Thatcher years, along with the blast furnaces, pithead winding gear, rolling mills and greasy, noisy old-style car production lines where such people used to toil. Yet in those days most families could manage on one wage, whereas now it takes two, plus a lot of tax breaks (and who pays for those in the end?).

So what did we gain? The only form of childcare which the state does not help or subsidise is the sort where a mother brings up her own sons and daughters.

In our new age of service industries, call centres, vast windowless warehouses, and of course the enormous empires of the NHS, care homes and social work, a female workforce suits everyone very well. Except the women. And above all, except their children, who in their hundreds of thousands are denied the presence of a full-time parent.

No doubt superwomen such as Nicola Horlick and Cherie Blair have always longed to sit on boards or be judges, on giant salaries.

Women such as these can afford superb nannies to do the work of a full-time mother. But for most wage-slave women, the work is drudgery and the wages poor, and it takes them away from children.

As American conservative thinker Helen Andrews has said of the post60s feminist generation: ‘Boomers promised that employment was the only way for women to be fulfilled and independent [but] any socialist could have told them that there is no one more dependent than a wage worker… The net effect has been to restrict the choices of typical women, taking the choice that was making most of them happy and removing it from the set of options.’

In the new British Democratic Republic, where most of what normal people used to think has now been ruled unacceptable and evil, Ms Andrews can say this (but only just) as she is a woman and lives in the US, where speech is still in many ways more free than it is here.

I, of course, have no opinions on this, being male. Soon, now all the political parties are in agreement, nobody will be able to dissent.

FOR the past week I have been fending off a Twitter mob raging over my point last week that the Nazis were Left-wing racists. One moron even claimed (thinking that ‘Left-wing’ means ‘good’) that I was excusing the Holocaust.

Look, the line between the

Nazis and their opponents was not as rigid and uncrossable as the Left like to think. Large numbers of Social Democrats and Communists joined the Nazi Brownshirts after Hitler took power. The German Left-wing historian Konrad Heiden noted it in his 1938 biography of Hitler.

The Nazis, with their huge social programmes, tight control over every aspect of society and loathing of Christianity and private life, have lots in common with the programmes of the Left. Stalin and Hitler got on surprisingly well. Left-wingers simply don’t believe they and their movement can do or think or say anything bad.

Well, they’re wrong. Let’s rejoice that the people screaming at me, and demanding I confess my evil deeds, recant or simply shut up, do not (yet) have any political power.