Griffin and BNP strategy

[dash_two]

Thanks for that, sensible and humane stuff KJ. I can't add much to that beyond a preference for a quota system set well below the current 185,000+ net annual figure and an emphasis on not importing cheap labour to compete with the unskilled and semiskilled, as they are the most vulnerable to competition for economic resources.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Thanks for that, sensible and humane stuff KJ. I can't add much to that beyond a preference for a quota system set well below the current 185,000+ net annual figure and an emphasis on not importing cheap labour to compete with the unskilled and semiskilled, as they are the most vulnerable to competition for economic resources.

Agree with that as well. A published figure and a ban on bringing in cheap labour to undercut British workers would be a good start. If people see effective enforcement against imported crims and wastrels then they will be more likely to back an expansion of giving asylum help.

 

[JimPage]

Agree with that as well. A published figure and a ban on bringing in cheap labour to undercut British workers would be a good start. .

but this isnt happenning, as you full well know. foreign labour is not undercutting so called "british" workers. the only people who say it is is the BNP and their fellow travllers

 

[KeyboardJockey]

but this isnt happenning, as you full well know. foreign labour is not undercutting so called "british" workers. the only people who say it is is the BNP and their fellow travllers

This info is not just coming from bnp and their fellow travellers I'm afraid. Family members in the building trade are being priced out of jobs. An old school friend who is working for a company approached his boss for a rise and was told 'shut up about that or you will be replaced by poles'

This is happening and closing your eyes to something doesn't make it go away.

BTW when I say British workers I don't just mean white people if that was what you were trying to insinuate by your use of quote marks I mean everyone who is a citizen here and who has a right to work.

 

[durruti02]

Despite the semi-flattering things I said upthread about the Cylops Fuhrers analysis, it must be said that the BNP will always fail to successfully build while the majority of their councillors are completely shit.

For everyone that gets elected, there's generally one elsewhere getting booted out for being inept or lazy.

It's no mystery, why would a bunch of race-obsessed criminals be anygood at handling issues like road safety, planning, benefits, drains and dogshit issues that are the day to day reality for life as a councillor?

i think this is right but this is precisely what griffin wants to get over

and we have been here before .. back in the 8ts harrington tried to move the NF to what griffin is doing today ... the only ever picked up a bit of support in havering ( i think) and hillingdon ( i think) .. esentially the hard core were not interested .. and indeed physically attacked harringtons group ( Third Way)

i suspect that is still the same today with the bnp .. it would be like trying to get the swp to commit to become community activists!! ) .. but worse

what worries me is that he may have watered down the racism enough ( superficially or otherwise) that he will attract a new type to the BNP who will be able to carry out this strategy maybe who would have joined the lib dems or tories

 

[durruti02]

Having observed the bnp at very close quarters I would say that they are beginning to learn the lessons of having idiots in electoral positions. They are just starting to get intellegent candidates and this may well be a sorting the wheat from the chaff situation where the more intellegent racists can grap their place in the ascendancy within th eparty.

This is the point in which to worry. A party made up of knuckledraggers is something you can take the piss out of but a party t hat is working for a wider appeal is much more dangerous.

well there you go! .. that was what i was going to ask kj .. but 2 posts on !!

 

[durruti02]

THe institute of race relations published some research which said that pandering to racist/anti migration parties actually INCREASED their vote... SO the lesson is....

pandering in what way??

a pro w/c position would be to at least first discuss immigration( SHOCK!) then defend immigrants and critically to attack the spivs who employ them ... many of whom i suspect are in the same sea as the m/c who are voting BNP

what is lacking attica is surely a w/c position on immigration .. it is that absence that is the problem surely?

 

[durruti02]

It was all so simpler . They marched, then got battered around the houses.

in three parts

so why does that strategy no longer work? and why indeed have the key activists around that strategy (AFA) rejected it?? times change MC

 

[durruti02]

in areas like barking, in means maintaining a mainly white area in a multiracial london, which isnt acceptable on any level. why should locals be prioritised, over, say asylum seekers- who have an equal right to live in barking as so called locals

jim why does an asylum seeker ( or more to the point an economic migrant) have 'an equal right' ?

 

[durruti02]

but this isnt happenning, as you full well know. foreign labour is not undercutting so called "british" workers. the only people who say it is is the BNP and their fellow travllers

that is just not true is it!! it has at the very least held down wages .. did you read this that knotted posted up yet?

Numbers vs. Rights: Trade-offs and guest worker programmes

http://www.compas.ox.ac.uk/publications/Working papers/WP0640-Ruhs-Martin.pdf

 

[The Black Hand]

that is just not true is it!! it has at the very least held down wages .. did you read this that knotted posted up yet?

Numbers vs. Rights: Trade-offs and guest worker programmes

http://www.compas.ox.ac.uk/publications/Working papers/WP0640-Ruhs-Martin.pdf

Of course it is undercutting wages. Many British people do not want to work for the minimum wage, and so haven't taken the jobs. 500K have come in from Europe esp. Poland and taken those jobs. The bosses needed to create a low wage economy, high job turnover, short term/no contracts, and they couldn't do this cos of the racalcitrant unemployed, disappeared, informal economy, and disabled workers...

Therefore Europe had to liberalise its people borders which de facto disciplines the workforces across Europe already in jobs. The struggles to come in France are going to be very interesting as a right winger takes on the unionised working class in order to restructure the economy... Any bells ringing there???

 

[audiotech]

so why does that strategy no longer work? and why indeed have the key activists around that strategy (AFA) rejected it?? times change MC

It was a bit of history and I pointed out how simple it was back then for anti-fascists. I wasn't arguing now for a tactic of opposing them on the streets when they are obviously not marching on said streets.

AFA eventually realised something that most anti-fascist activists had sussed out a long time before their "key activists" anyway.

Of course that may change. Afterall, a core strategy of fascism is control of the streets.

 

[audiotech]

Relying on some anecdotal rambling about a some "mate" who has been told by "his boss" that if he doesn't accept such and such then this will happen (as some posters do) is just being bone idle and dangerous. More concrete evidence suggests something else is happening in the labour market.

A major survey of employers has just taken place, one that has been reported in the financial press only this week. It indicates growing concerns over labour shortages across the board. Nearly 50 percent of businesses surveyed said that it was becoming increasingly difficult to fill vacancies.

Now, this evidence can surely give a shot in the arm to workers as it indicates that they have the upper hand in negotiations don't they?

Challenge your boss who threatens you with employing a Polish worker on less pay, because he is more than likely bullshitting. It is like when British Gas used to go around trying to get people to change their supplier by saying they were British owned and all the others were foreign - they lied.

The conclusions of the survey stated that the recent influx of migrants had slowed the growth of wages (not undercut them) and had put off an explosion in wage demands (that employers had expected) due to recent rises in the cost of living.

This is important and one that needs to be understood not only when talking about immigration, but also when you're faced over the table in negotiations with some twat in a suit telling you to accept without question the bullshit coming from his gob.

Let's also not forget that businesses are deliberately pushing up their prices now.

 

[audiotech]

Agree with that as well. A published figure and a ban on bringing in cheap labour to undercut British workers would be a good start. If people see effective enforcement against imported crims and wastrels then they will be more likely to back an expansion of giving asylum help.

You call yourself a trade unionist. Pah!

You sir are an idiot and have swallowed hook line and sinker the fascist bollocks that you duplicate, along with your cohorts on here.

 

[Streathamite]

but this isnt happenning, as you full well know. foreign labour is not undercutting so called "british" workers. the only people who say it is is the BNP and their fellow travllers

I'm sorry but you couldn't be more misinformed (as one would expect from someone naive and deluded to be a WESPECK acolyte). There is a near-universal consensus within the recruitment and staffing industry that in the bluecollar, casual, low-skill white collar catering and leisure industries that wages have been kept very lowe, and employers given a huge licence to act as they wish, by the arrival of large amounts of cheap, willing labour from overseas.
Personally, I'd say that whole industry sector, manned entirely by people who talk jobs all day long, are in a far better position to form a viewk, than you.
I also work in recruitment (albeit in a high-end 'permanent' sector), and so, assuredly, do I!
And I can guarantee you that the HR depts of the major organisations have planed their strategy and policies around this state of affairs continuing (in fact one HR director for a large catering & hospitality organisation told me himself it was the best thing to happen to his outfit's margins for years, given that catering is high turnover, low margins.
It is simple supply and demand, and the fact that if you give a large corporation means and motive to dick the workforce, they'll take it.
I suggest you check your facts a little more carefully

 

[KeyboardJockey]

You call yourself a trade unionist. Pah!

You sir are an idiot and have swallowed hook line and sinker the fascist bollocks that you duplicate, along with your cohorts on here.

Its happening not in the vast amounts that those in the extreme right would have people believe but it's happening enough to have an affect and for accusatioins and complaints of 'job taking' by the fash to be taken up. The building industry for instance is a case in point.

It is because of there being an element of truth in the job taking line that the bnp are getting a hearing.

I don't see what is wrong with protecting British workers first if the left doesn't then the right will or will appear to to gain support. After all there have been campaigns to prevent British call centre work being transferred overseas? whats the difference?

I don't swallow any fascist bollocks but a lot of people are, far more than those on the left would like to think.

The next few years will be the lefts 'last chance saloon' with respect (no pun intended) to deal with the bnp. If the left can head the bnp off at the pass by saying they will protect UK workers then a whole lot of people can be won away from the bnp. This doesn't preclude internationalist actions just a change of focus to those the unions were set up for.

 

[audiotech]

Its happening not in the vast amounts that those in the extreme right would have people believe but it's happening enough to have an affect and for accusatioins and complaints of 'job taking' by the fash to be taken up. The building industry for instance is a case in point.

It is because of there being an element of truth in the job taking line that the bnp are getting a hearing.

I don't see what is wrong with protecting British workers first if the left doesn't then the right will or will appear to to gain support. After all there have been campaigns to prevent British call centre work being transferred overseas? whats the difference?

I don't swallow any fascist bollocks but a lot of people are, far more than those on the left would like to think.

The next few years will be the lefts 'last chance saloon' with respect (no pun intended) to deal with the bnp. If the left can head the bnp off at the pass by saying they will protect UK workers then a whole lot of people can be won away from the bnp. This doesn't preclude internationalist actions just a change of focus to those the unions were set up for.

The building industry being a case in point? Nonsense. It is growing at a pace and will continue to in the foreseeable future.

UK Construction Industry

The industry over the past 7 years has had the most sustained period of growth in decades. The industry’s key resources are its people & skills, therefore the pay & conditions package of the workforce is a key factor in the development of the industry.

We need only consider that in the twelve months to the end of November 2006 the top 30 contractors in the UK construction industry had completed or were engaged in some 4,290 projects with a combined value of £23,216M to have an immediate snapshot of the buoyant demand.

The main industry ‘customers’ continue to be a mix of public sector and large private sector corporations, with retail heavily represented. That said, by far the largest client in the twelve months to December 2006 was the Department for Health who awarded a total of 210 contracts with a total value of £3,166.8M.

Current developments are encouraging industry insiders, such as the Construction Products Association, to predict that, "overall construction growth will continue to outpace that of the UK economy over the next three years".
http://www.amicustheunion.org/Default.aspx?page=6316

As for the rest of your post? Scared rabbit stuff with you paralysed by the headlights of the BNP. So scared you adopt their ideas.

 

[becky p]

These assumptions are based on ignorance. Furthermore, polls are not scientific and they can be easily manipulated. Yougov, huh?

Your idea is to pander to the BNP by doing their job for them..your solution to the BNP is to end immigration - it's lazy thinking that is the product of a mind that is locked into a binary mode of operation. And who are these "immigrants" that you are so concerned about? I wonder....

Immigration controls are based on xenophobia and racism. The BNP is both xenophobic and racist. Playing their game is short-sighted and dangerous.

Take your patronising guff and stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

So in other words unless polls and evidence indicate that everything you say is right,they can be discounted.

Accusing people of being racist and playing the BNPs game,when they question immigration, seems to be a great way of helping the BNP.

 

[The Black Hand]

The building industry being a case in point? Nonsense. It is growing at a pace and will continue to in the foreseeable future.

As for the rest of your post? Scared rabbit stuff with you paralysed by the headlights of the BNP. So scared you adopt their ideas.

I am not convinced, you are painting a rosy picture of the booming UK economy which has growth that more than absorbs the increased supply of workers. As you know the simple rule of supply and demand, more workers looking for work depresses wages. I am not sure if it is you or me who is being the new Adam Smith.

Certainly both trends are in evidence, but the dominant tendency is the creation of a low wage economy - or 'Netto wages for Netto prices'. The growing polarisation of the rich from the poor means that this low wage sector is growing. I don't accept your version (higher wages - bigger middling section of society) which goes against concrete research that has already demonstrated the growing polarisation (lower wages - poverty pay).

 

[LLETSA]

so why does that strategy no longer work? and why indeed have the key activists around that strategy (AFA) rejected it?? times change MC

Why let that get in the way of a good wank?

 

[The Black Hand]

Why let that get in the way of a good wank?

Each to their own

 

[treelover]

No replies then, Trotbots, watch that plane come down in flames...

I'm sorry but you couldn't be more misinformed (as one would expect from someone naive and deluded to be a WESPECK acolyte). There is a near-universal consensus within the recruitment and staffing industry that in the bluecollar, casual, low-skill white collar catering and leisure industries that wages have been kept very lowe, and employers given a huge licence to act as they wish, by the arrival of large amounts of cheap, willing labour from overseas.
Personally, I'd say that whole industry sector, manned entirely by people who talk jobs all day long, are in a far better position to form a viewk, than you.
I also work in recruitment (albeit in a high-end 'permanent' sector), and so, assuredly, do I!
And I can guarantee you that the HR depts of the major organisations have planed their strategy and policies around this state of affairs continuing (in fact one HR director for a large catering & hospitality organisation told me himself it was the best thing to happen to his outfit's margins for years, given that catering is high turnover, low margins.
It is simple supply and demand, and the fact that if you give a large corporation means and motive to dick the workforce, they'll take it.
I suggest you check your facts a little more carefully

 

[dash_two]

Article dated May 2007 about a report into wages and immigration commissioned by the Low Pay Unit and carried out by University College London:

The report goes on to say that although the arrival of economic migrants has benefited workers in the middle and upper part of the wage distribution, immigration has placed downward pressure on the wages of workers in receipt of lower levels of pay.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/media/library/immigration

 

[nino_savatte]

Of course there is scapegoating but by the time the houses are built the bnp will have got even more support.

Well, there are a couple of issues here that have, thus far, been dismissed out of hand by the hardline anti-immigrationists: the first, is that aping the BNP's stance on immigration is a very dangerous game to play. The second, is that when one talks about the "working class", one tends to mean "white working class" and, even with that phrase, there is a problematic, because it presumes that all working class people have similar thoughts and beliefs on a range of issues, namely immigration. it also overlooks the fact that many so-called working class people draw down incomes that are comparable to City salaries.

This is political expediency, nothing more and nothing less. If my finger hurts, do I cut off my hand to relieve the pain? No.

 

[nino_savatte]

No replies then, Trotbots, watch that plane come down in flames...

Quoting your own posts again, eh treelover?

 

[Darios]

If people see effective enforcement against imported crims and wastrels then they will be more likely to back an expansion of giving asylum help.

What about effective enforcement against home grown crims and wastrels?

 

[KeyboardJockey]

What about effective enforcement against home grown crims and wastrels?

Oh that as well. There are loads of people who are capable and free to work and contribute to society who don't. I'm less concerned with those who claim benefits but putsomething back into their local community (loads of people claim but do good works for their local community or are carers etc etc) what I object to is people who claim benefits and just spend their time lounging round and or making life miserable for others. Plus an increase in the minimum wage would help to encourage people back to work.

By the way I'm not trying to say deserving or underserving poor here I'm just saying target those who take from the state and community but a) don't put anything back and b) take the piss c) cause trouble in their area.

 

[nino_savatte]

What about effective enforcement against home grown crims and wastrels?

Innit? This lot thinks that there is some vast network of crims who want to come here and take advantage of our 'generous' benefits system.

Then there's the foreign paedophile argument; none of these arguments holds water and it would appear that this is the line adopted by the far right to lend 'weight' to their 'argument'. It's easier to smear people than to tell the truth.

 

[nino_savatte]

Let's have a look through the round window today, shall we?

For starters, a recent Sunday Times YouGov poll found that:



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1782117.ece

For the main course, another recent YouGov poll, this time in the Telegraph. When asked to list Blair's failures, at number one, with 58%, was allowing immigration to rise to unacceptable levels. See the 'click to enlarge' link on this page:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/30/nblairdec30.xml

I've saved this last one for dessert. Even a cynic like me got a bit of a shock reading it. It's from a 2002 poll commissioned by the BBC into attitudes towards immigration. Among other questions, people were asked:



30% of all respondents said it has benefitted our society. 44% said it has damaged it. 26% went for 'don't know' - probably the biggest 'don't know' response I've ever seen in a poll. (I would probably be one of them.) You'll need to scroll down and click on the questions to see the responses.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/uk/2002/race/survey.stm#Immigration

I'm afraid that none of this supports your position nor do polls, in themselves mean a great deal.

Do you know how polls, such as this and others, are conducted? Do you know how questions are written and how and in which order they are placed? How about the commissioner of polls, do you know much about them?

On another day, you'd probably take a pop at Yougov but here, you sing their praises. Did you look at the Telegraph 'poll'? I don;t think you did, it was actually an article about Blair's tenure of office that was based on the results of a poll...conducted by the Daily Telegraph.

Do you understand what a "narrative" is?

Back to clown school with you, your culinary skills suck.

 

[dash_two]

Did you look at the Telegraph 'poll'? I don;t think you did, it was actually an article about Blair's tenure of office that was based on the results of a poll...conducted by the Daily Telegraph.

The Daily Telegraph did not conduct the poll.

YouGov repeated the question last week in its survey for The Daily Telegraph and the results are devastating.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/30/nblairdec30.xml