Immigration .. part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism??

[belboid]

That's just a statement, no more.

yeah I know - because I dont think it is an important argument, or a relevant one. You can be an excellant internationalist even if you support some kind of national borders.

 

[belboid]

You do know that was all I was asking for your opinion on. That wasn't so difficult was it?

fraid it was actually, as I couldn't tell what you were actually asking.

Now, were I building a miniscule grouplet, that had to have the perfect answers on everything, then i would say that supporting no borders was essential - but I have no interest in building a miniscule grouplet - as don't the vast majority of what I think are being termed the 'orthodox left'.

 

[LLETSA]

I'm well aware of the dire state of the left in this country, and the need for it to face up to that reality and rebuild it pretty much from the bottom up. But that doesn't mean one has to dump every principle along the way. The demand for no borders is not one that should be put at the top of the agenda for any serious w-c group, there are obviously far far more immediate practical demands that take precedence. But it is still I principle that I would support, and argue for, if asked. your chimera seems like more of a straw man to me.

To argue against open borders is not to dump any principle; it is not a principle of left, or pro-working class politics now and never has been.

Don't understand your last sentence. What I was using the word for was to express incredulity that people on the left are still justifying things on the basis of what would happen in 'a communist world', when the first attempt to build one has been roundly defeated and there is nothing on the horizon to suggest that there is another attempt on the horizon. And to do this in an attempt to justify ideas that are irrelevant to the rebuilding process that you acknowledge ought to be taking place.

 

[LLETSA]

I'm afraid that you are not always as clear as you think you are. Lose a bit of the ego.

You clearly have nothing to say. And, as far as I am aware, nobody on these boards knows me. How, then, as an anonymous poster, can I be indulging my ego?

 

[Knotted]

To argue against open borders is not to dump any principle; it is not a principle of left, or pro-working class politics now and never has been.

Well, certainly the SWP have always seen it that way. I think the WRP as well.

I take your point though. Where does this 'principle' of open borders come from? Any takers?

 

[belboid]

Don't understand your last sentence. What I was using the word for was to express incredulity that people on the left are still justifying things on the basis of what would happen in 'a communist world', when the first attempt to build one has been roundly defeated and there is nothing on the horizon to suggest that there is another attempt on the horizon. And to do this in an attempt to justify ideas that are irrelevant to the rebuilding process that you acknowledge ought to be taking place.

the point is that this is an abstract argument, hence it will involve abstract concepts - up to and including ones hopes and idea's for the future. I am not going to deny that that is my belief when asked, but it doesnt stop any other work being done with people who disagree with me in the meanwhile, and to say otherwise is untrue.

 

[Poi E]

You clearly have nothing to say. And, as far as I am aware, nobody on these boards knows me. How, then, as an anonymous poster, can I be indulging my ego?

I rest my case. I'll carry on reading the thread and ignore your throw-away references.

 

[durruti02]

I understand that Durrutti and yourself? are in favor of community controll of immigration.
This sounds like a nice idea, community controll of any thing sounds good to people of left/liberterian/socialist leanings and in most cases an ideal to aim for. Community controll of immigration though, the more I think about it is not something that as a trade unionist and non party affiliated socialist I would argue for. For these resons
1, If communities were in a position to controll their immigration. In other words make their own political demands on central/local government they would also be in a position to make other damands. Like full investment in to community facilities, social housing with affordable rents and good maintenence, funding in to local health care and training scheems. In other words all of those things that immigrants are accused draining from communities in the first place.
2,How would community controll of immigration actually be faught for? By phisically preventing immigrants from settleing in the community. Phisically removing recent immigrants from their new found homes? That is a recipy for racial violence.
3,It would alienate ethnic minorities in those communities and beond. It would lead to ghettoisation. White communities would stay white, muslim communities would only attract/recieve muslims, black,black etc etc. Then each community could argue with it's neigbouring communities for government money. It would lead to a "Why is the black estate getting a new school and not our white one?" situation.
4,How would trade unions respond to this? promote a british citizens only polocy in work places? Refuse to organise immigrant labour. That really would be counter productive for the whole TU movement

As I say, community controll of immigration sounds like a plan, but it would solve nothing. I still say that class unity is the only real solution

patty

re .. 1) near the top of this thread a number of pracitical udeas were put forward .. one of them is the return to sons and daughters/ another woudl be that tenats control allocations etc etc .. things move hand in hand .. but essentially it is about what helps the w/c recover power .. sorry to patronise ( and i sure i sounded pompous above ) but the w/c has lost a fuck of a lot of power in my life time .. maybe something you have not seen .. TA's were far more powerfull .. and in factories unions were far more powerful .. we are in a period were if we ever want to see change we must be working both at work and were we live to rebuild w/c organisation ..

the things you talk about .. funding .. are good but they do not lead to incresed power for the w/c

re 2) see above e.g on housing allocation .. the bosses would hate it!! and this is why we have seen the massive liberalisation of housing over the years .. i am not asking anyone to go anywhere

re 3) .. have confidence in ordinary people mate .. yo are showing the distrust of the w/c that is typical of the left .. yes it is likely that many areas will be parochial .. indeed racist BUT BUT BUT we have to go thru this .. we have to have faith .. if you can not trust w/c people we may as well give up ..

re 4) .. the unions are in no position to do anything!! BUT yes they should argue that jobs should be done by local people .. of course..why not??? as diane abbot (!!) said why are we importing finns and philipinos as nurses when thousends of black youth are unemployed ??? .. of course once an immigrant has a job they are equal to you and me and should be organised ..

all this is about how we are going to chnage things though .. things will only change when w/c people BELIEVE they can change the world .. at the minute the do not and become reactionary ... for w/c people to think they can changethe world they will need small victories ..instead the left does nothing practical just use absurd slogans ..

 

[durruti02]

Another good post patty.



So capitalism uses immigration for its own ends. So what? Capitalism uses labour for its own ends. Should we all give up our jobs?

All you seem to be saying is that immigration can lead to problems and is used by the capitalists. Again, and what?

and what CR .. because you and the swps run around with nonsense slogans like " defend the muslim community!" .. and the other 95% of the population think who are these wankers .. no wonder the left are ridiculed

CR why is it that the left are ridiculed??

 

[james_walsh]

That's about what it comes down to.

I don't like the capitalist mood of production, but like every one on these boads we have no choice but to par take to a certain degree- or do suggest we don't eat.Your full smug shit. you've proved you've got no agreement apart from smug grandstanding, so . fuck off.

 

[durruti02]

Agreed. Totally.

Some of us are arguing that as workers we ought to use that control/power to ensure that no person should be prevented from movement. But failing that, where would you draw your lines? Along which borders?

Me, I moved from Kent to work in Nottingham pits in the 60s. Thousands upon thousands moved from Scotland and the North East to pits all over England. Thousands more from Scotland to steelworks in the midlands. They got the same shit about taking local peoples housing. You couldn't go down a pit and not bump into a Pole. In the way capitalism works, all of us were holding down wages because they'd have to have paid shitloads more to get enough local people to do the job.

Despite your claim that it's Yuppies migrating to London, it's loads of young working class people who are fleeing the once industrial towns of the North and Midlands. Get out of Hackney and see whats happening in other parts of the country.

And as for those pull-the-ladder-up-after-you types - as bad as scabs in my book.

ROH .. the question is how do we build a movement??? you should know this that the power of the NUM and the reason the tories hated them so was no just cos they contoled coal/power but that they had control of the face ... few industries in this country have had such workers power ..

you too will have noticed the loss of power as workers we have .. so we can do fck all to help people who need to move move .. in my dads day the workers and chapels of his town took in basque refugees .. what w/c community could do that now??!!!

do you not see that i/we are trying to help rebuild communities so they will be in future be ABLE to take in refugees .. not have refugees / immigrants dumped in them as now with no resources???

you say it is just the way capitalism works .. yes my point exactly .. and i /we are trying to do something about it ..

p.s. you tell me to get out of hackney?? i am not commenting on what is happenning elsewhere .. but i can tell you that when most builders and nurses here were geordies and welsh 20 years ago they are now poles or philipinos .. so i don't know where all these northerners are going mate ..

if you think this is pulling - up - the - ladder you have totally missed the point of this whole thread .. it is about how we give ordinary people power and dignity whatever their race or origin ..

 

[durruti02]

What you don't think a world where the working class has freedom of movement would be a good thing i.e. a socialist world?

The fight for freedom of movement goes hand in hand with the fight for socialism, which is why the repetitive stuff that tbaldwin comes out with is such a load of crap i.e. equating freedom of movement for the working class as being a neo-liberal agenda.

The breaking down of nationalism and national borders is an intrinisic part of the fight for international socialism.

I'd be interested to see someone coming back on the points patty raised above.

you do not get freedom of movement by putting up a slogan .. you get it by creating real workers power by building from the base

 

[durruti02]

- I want to leave aside the case for open borders (a case which I have yet to hear made coherently - cetainly I agree with the critique of current problems, but no indepth investigation of what the consequences of an open border policy would be has been made - I'd like to see one)
________________________________________________________
The general point that immigration hurts the interests of the "native" uk "working class" is misguided - immigrant workers share the same concerns as uk workers - their interests are our interests and vice versa. The problem is globalisation and if you have any beef with globalisation, direct your criticism at the economic system and its proponents, not at the immigrants themselves.

durruti02, the thread starter, bemoans that his opinion is deemed as racist by the pc left - its not racist, but it is, in my opinion, mistaken: its a trap to blame others in the same hole as yourself. Theres a bigger picture...

-this has probably been said somewhere in the past 18 pages...sorry if im repeating others.

yes you should have read the thread .. you have misssed the point .. no one on here is blaming immigrants or refugees .. what is being said is how do we move to the world we all want .. by building from the base .. or sloganeering

 

[durruti02]

They do indeed. And so do the british working class (as long as it's not their own, it seems). The bosses have taken their manufacturing to parts of the world where people will work for very little. The british working class buy the cheap imports. Borders mean that the working class can't move away from those crap wages. Cheap clothes at other peoples misery.

so you think we should all chase capital???? thats daft mate sorry but it is ..

no we should , for now, make capital do our bidding till the glorious day!

 

[durruti02]

to CR BB etc .. so anyway .. what was the deal at Gate Gourmet?? was that not a case of importing immigrants to break the union??

 

[belboid]

they used agency labour, making use of the shameful labour laws which allows for such people to be taken on at a lower rate.

 

[cockneyrebel]

and what CR .. because you and the swps run around with nonsense slogans like " defend the muslim community!" .. and the other 95% of the population think who are these wankers .. no wonder the left are ridiculed

What are you talking about. I'm not in the SWP. But I can't say I've got a problem with saying defend Muslim communities from racist attacks.

one of them is the return to sons and daughters

As I said earlier. This would mean that single people would be living in four/five bedroom properties while families lived in hostels. How can you justify that?

Also sons and daughters would do absolutely nothing to stop the housing shortage, which is the overwhelming problem. As also said earlier, there are nearly 17,000 people on the waiting list of my local council (and nearly 2000 in the top priority band) and only about 1000 people get rehoused every year. Far more than that join the list every year.

another woudl be that tenats control allocations

How would this work? Do you mean on an estate by estate/street by street basis? How would you manage housing lists, when there would be 100s of housing lists in a single borough alone. And how would that, in any way, solve the central problem which is a massive shortage of social housing.

On patty's "point 2" you totally avoid the question. How would local people enforce who does live and doesn't live in an area? Most immigrants live in shitty private housing.

You say that the left has abstract demands, but what you're saying seems pretty abstract to me. There won't being any council housing left by 2010 if the Labour government gets its way, that's the main issue for social housing at the moment.

have confidence in ordinary people mate .. yo are showing the distrust of the w/c that is typical of the left .. yes it is likely that many areas will be parochial .. indeed racist BUT BUT BUT we have to go thru this .. we have to have faith .. if you can not trust w/c people we may as well give up ..

But there are progressive and reactionary layers in the working class. The working class isn't one big homogenous group, far from it. It's got nothing to do with not having faith in the working class but trying to mobilise the most progressive sections of the working class and building from there. Not trying to work with people on the lowest common denominator.

Are you seriously saying that it's ok if there are local housing groups who implement racist policies, because that's just something we have to go through?

Also you keep talking about practical things, but most of what you are saying seems like abstract talk to me.

 

[durruti02]

they used agency labour, making use of the shameful labour laws which allows for such people to be taken on at a lower rate.

of course but bb most youth/workers here and now wouldn't take those wages .. which is why they are letting in poles who will etc etc

 

[cockneyrebel]

to CR BB etc .. so anyway .. what was the deal at Gate Gourmet?? was that not a case of importing immigrants to break the union??

As belboid says, the problem was the anti-union laws and fuck wit right wing trade union bureaucrats. If the T&G bureaucrats hadn't done all they could to get the secondary strikes called off, the dispute would have been won. The issue was scabs, not immigrants. Scabs are always available, immigration or no immigration.

On that note did people know the T&G hasn't released any of the donations to the striking workers yet. Fucking bastards.

 

[belboid]

of course but bb most youth/workers here and now would take those wages .. which is why they are letting in poles who will etc etc

i take it you mean 'wouldn't'?

 

[durruti02]

What are you talking about. I'm not in the SWP. But I can't say I've got a problem with saying defend Muslim communities from racist attacks.
As I said earlier. This would mean that single people would be living in four/five bedroom properties while families lived in hostels. How can you justify that?
Also sons and daughters would do absolutely nothing to stop the housing shortage, which is the overwhelming problem. As also said earlier, there are nearly 17,000 people on the waiting list of my local council (and nearly 2000 in the top priority band) and only about 1000 people get rehoused every year. Far more than that join the list every year.

How would this work? Do you mean on an estate by estate/street by street basis? How would you manage housing lists, when there would be 100s of housing lists in a single borough alone. And how would that, in any way, solve the central problem which is a massive shortage of social housing.

On patty's "point 2" you totally avoid the question. How would local people enforce who does live and doesn't live in an area? You say that the left has abstract demands, but what you're saying seems pretty abstract to me. There won't being any council housing left by 2010 if the Labour government gets its way, that's the main issue for social housing at the moment.
But there are progressive and reactionary layers in the working class. The working class isn't one big homogenous group, far from it. It's got nothing to do with not having faith in the working class but trying to mobilise the most progressive sections of the working class and building from there. Not trying to work with people on the lowest common denominator.
Are you seriously saying that it's ok if there are local housing groups who implement racist policies, because that's just something we have to go through?
Also you keep talking about practical things, but most of what you are saying seems like abstract talk to me.

OH MY GOD CR .. you are arguing that it is impratical to let the w/c control things .. how are you in a group called workers power!!! ( yes i know you are not a swpy)

 

[cockneyrebel]

OH MY GOD CR .. you are arguing that it is impratical to let the w/c control things .. how are you in a group called workers power!!!

Can you try and leave out the patronising smug tone?

How am I arguing against workers control. I'm arguing against out and out localism. There is a big difference. I'm asking how you see things working in a practical way and this is all you can say.

 

[durruti02]

Can you try and leave out the patronising smug tone?

How am I arguing against workers control. I'm arguing against out and out localism. There is a big difference. I'm asking how you see things working in a practical way and this is all you can say.

no you ARE arguing against workers control .. all you do is put up obstacles .. ..

""How would this work? Do you mean on an estate by estate/street by street basis? How would you manage housing lists, when there would be 100s of housing lists in a single borough alone. And how would that, in any way, solve the central problem which is a massive shortage of social housing.""

fking hell man it will come out in the wash .. i see you and you're fellow trots come out with nowt that actually increases the confidence and power of w/c people .. face it please we are at year zero in terms of left influence in the w.c .. and you still obviously can not see how the neo liberal restructuring has worked ..


ok sorry being fair .. yes it means people/ta's asserting control of where they live .. you are a trade unionist right?? well everyday at work is a fight over power with the managers yes?? .. and the little victories give us a good feeling .. class conciousness you might call it .. we NEED to get that in communities .. otherwise we WILL see an increse in racism etc etc

 

[durruti02]

i take it you mean 'wouldn't'?

yep cheers

 

[durruti02]

As belboid says, the problem was the anti-union laws and fuck wit right wing trade union bureaucrats. If the T&G bureaucrats hadn't done all they could to get the secondary strikes called off, the dispute would have been won. The issue was scabs, not immigrants. Scabs are always available, immigration or no immigration.

On that note did people know the T&G hasn't released any of the donations to the striking workers yet. Fucking bastards.

of course it is anti trade union laws .. of course it is agency .. of course it is tng bureaus .. but you are wrong here ..

""Scabs are always available, immigration or no immigration.""

.. this is simple not true is it???!!!

 

[Patty]

all this is about how we are going to chnage things though .. things will only change when w/c people BELIEVE they can change the world .. at the minute the do not and become reactionary ... for w/c people to think they can changethe world they will need small victories ..instead the left does nothing practical just use absurd slogans ..

I wont pick at point after point, that would take a massive post. But..

I see your general point, the workers have lost a lot of ground over the last 20 years. It wasnt gained in first place by a workers movment that took a hostile stance towards immigrants though. Don't say there were no immigrants, the brittish working class has absorbred wave after wave of immigrants. From Irish "navvies", Eurpean Jews. During the post war period there were massive waves of West Indians and South Asians.
I'm not saying that theese influxes didn't create initial tention but many of thees immigrants and their decendents have become amoungst the most militant of class fighters.

Tenents controll of housing is desirable, it would represent a step forward for the workers movment if it was done on a large scale. On it's own though it would not solve the need to build new houses or bring the resourses needed to maintain the existing ones. Only a fight for resourses from those who presently controll them could do that. Unless were talking about a revolution in wich such resources are controlled by the (much more democratically than they are now) organised working class. A sons and daughters policy does not solve this issue either, especially since most couples have more than one son or daughter.

If communities were to close themselves to new comers that would not stop immigrants from entering the country in the first place. They would still have to settle/be settled some where. It stands to reason that muslim communities would be more open to muslims, Samali to Samaliens etc etc.

You say that I have no faith in ordinary people that I show a distrust of the w.c that is typical of the left. This relates to your point about the working having lost a lot of their power, wich I whole hertedly agree with. The working class also seemsto have gone backwards in terms of political awareness. The effects of this I see in my every day life. The far right is on the upward turn in many white working class ex Labour Party heartlands. Day after day almost I stand helpless as my work mates just shrug their shoulders at the extension of their hours with out over time, the incredibly slow progress made on our peice work at a dismall rate. I work with a local trade union structure made up of tired old labour party men, and yes the TnG burocracy dismally failed the Gate Gormet workers. I dont see that how attacking immigrants will change these things other than pandering to the parasite of the far right in our communites.
I know all the above sounds gloomy and beilive me if I didn't have that faith that you talk about Durruti, I would'nt be the person that I am. There are a great many other issues that could be brought up about why the class is on the back foot, such as the bankruptcy of Social Democracy and the buracratisation of the TU movment but I supose those things are for other threads.

 

[exosculate]

I wont pick at point after point, that would take a massive post. But..

I see your general point, the workers have lost a lot of ground over the last 20 years. It wasnt gained in first place by a workers movment that took a hostile stance towards immigrants though. Don't say there were no immigrants, the brittish working class has absorbred wave after wave of immigrants. From Irish "navvies", Eurpean Jews. During the post war period there were massive waves of West Indians and South Asians.
I'm not saying that theese influxes didn't create initial tention but many of thees immigrants and their decendents have become amoungst the most militant of class fighters.

Tenents controll of housing is desirable, it would represent a step forward for the workers movment if it was done on a large scale. On it's own though it would not solve the need to build new houses or bring the resourses needed to maintain the existing ones. Only a fight for resourses from those who presently controll them could do that. Unless were talking about a revolution in wich such resources are controlled by the (much more democratically than they are now) organised working class. A sons and daughters policy does not solve this issue either, especially since most couples have more than one son or daughter.

If communities were to close themselves to new comers that would not stop immigrants from entering the country in the first place. They would still have to settle/be settled some where. It stands to reason that muslim communities would be more open to muslims, Samali to Samaliens etc etc.

You say that I have no faith in ordinary people that I show a distrust of the w.c that is typical of the left. This relates to your point about the working having lost a lot of their power, wich I whole hertedly agree with. The working class also seemsto have gone backwards in terms of political awareness. The effects of this I see in my every day life. The far right is on the upward turn in many white working class ex Labour Party heartlands. Day after day almost I stand helpless as my work mates just shrug their shoulders at the extension of their hours with out over time, the incredibly slow progress made on our peice work at a dismall rate. I work with a local trade union structure made up of tired old labour party men, and yes the TnG burocracy dismally failed the Gate Gormet workers. I dont see that how attacking immigrants will change these things other than pandering to the parasite of the far right in our communites.
I know all the above sounds gloomy and beilive me if I didn't have that faith that you talk about Durruti, I would'nt be the person that I am. There are a great many other issues that could be brought up about why the class is on the back foot, such as the bankruptcy of Social Democracy and the buracratisation of the TU movment but I supose those things are for other threads.

Any chance of you declaring any political affiliations?

 

[Patty]

Any chance of you declaring any political affiliations?

TnG member. Non party affiliated socialist. Been close to SWP in past but hey who hasn't. Strong Labour Party/Trot up bringing. I'm inclined to ask why you ask?

 

[sihhi]

The working class also seemsto have gone backwards in terms of political awareness.

Does "going backwards"= no longer listening to their respective Bennite/McLennanite/Cliffite vanguards?

I dont see that how attacking immigrants will change these things other than pandering to the parasite of the far right in our communites.

Where have you gotten the above from? I have argued on my previous posts for 100% equal rights with indigenous British Passport citizens- for all W.Permit immigrants and undocumented/false documents immigrants in Britain. Re-read those posts and others' posts.

What people have been attacking and questioning amongst other things is the situation where the state and the majority of UK capital uses migration law (and policing relating to it) on their terms for their own advantage.

 

[sihhi]

I mentioned what else is going on in other parts of Europe in my post y/day

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=3568270&postcount=427

because in Switzerland the referendum about "immigration- yes or no" is taking place on Sunday- and similar things might be repeated in othe countries with a referendum history.

Also I have a problem with your assertion Patty- that durruti02 or others with a similar position are "pandering to the parasite of the far right in our communites".

If someone says "I think there should be any immigration from outside" "I'm against war in Iraq" or "I'm against the European Union"- are they pandering to the far-right? These are all things the farright (BNP, NF, BBP, WNA included) have as desires coming as they do from a resolutely statist, anti-immigration, anti-EU, and anti-British involvement in Middle East conflicts positions (aswell as worse besides).