Immigration .. part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism??

[TremulousTetra]

you support the rightist agenda of 70s unions? the closed shop was a rightwing construct.

I think you're getting a bit confused here aren't you?

its incoherent gobbldygook and its sad to see so many poeple who think they are radical led by the nose by the Daily Mail.

I do have to say I am also disappointed.

 

[tbaldwin]

its incoherent gobbldygook and its sad to see so many poeple who think they are radical led by the nose by the Daily Mail.

Utter Utter shite. I hate the Daily Mail but that does not mean that i take a childish view of that whatever it says i have to say the opposite,that is just reactionary rubbish...

Migration is an obsession of mine ( as you point out) People like you who have not given the issue any serious thought and just want to dismiss anyone who strays from the reactionary type shite the Independent says on the issue as Daily Mail reactionaries are playing a silly game.

Economic migration is a Class issue and an Internationalist one.
From either perspective mass migartion is a tragedy.

 

[tbaldwin]

you are absolutely right, but I don't remember Karl Marx or any other socialist arguing you accept hook line and sinker the contradictory arguments of the ruling class, in order to relate to the working class. I do not think parroting what the fasists say will do us any favour, we have to distinguish ourselves.

Neither Durrutti or i or anyone else on here is parroting Fascists.
We are totally opposed to them and many times i have put my liberty and safety at risk fighting the twats.
The BNP etc are a sad bunch that can only gain popularity because the rest of the political establishment talks such contradictory shit on migration.
Sections of the Right FREEMARKETERS pretend to be against it. And sections of the Left who believe in regulation etc seem to believe in the free market for Labour......

In order to appeal to the working class as a whole you need to tell the TRUTH.
And that is Economic Migration makes the World a more unequal place and that increased competition for Jobs and Housing has a very different effect for the Rich and the Poorer sections of the community in the UK.
If you cant tell that basic truth how do you expect to win anyones trust or respect?

 

[Hanoipete]

You give too much prominence to this subject, its hysteria. Immigration isnt the problem, resources are. Because the richest 2% and big business do not pay tax.

The 70s Trade Unions and the closed shop were/are right wing, elitist, cabals. Disgusting. The labour movement was generally right wing, you dont distinguish.

You do not like the fact that you are being challenged, that you have been given an agenda - immigration - by the right and now you are trying to pretend you are a free thinker, its the same symtoms of Hitchens and the Euston Manifesto types. Embittered old socialists who hate the fact left wing politics have gone libertarian/Chomskyite and will do for the next 150 years until they run the gaff...

Sorry, nation states and old fashioned labour movements and the experiment in `free markets` (and the rest) are dying/dead.

International law, sustainability, participatory democracy, disarmamanet is what will govern the end of this century and the next. Not state-capitalism, borders and immigration police...

 

[tbaldwin]

Participatory democracy... Erm sounds like the kind of shite Red Pepper and other LIBERAL SUPREMACISTS come out with.
A bit like consultation "we ask you loaded questions" and if you answer correctly thats democracy....
What about asking local communities how they think social housing should be allocated or how to deal with anti social crime.

 

[TremulousTetra]

In order to appeal to the working class as a whole you need to tell the TRUTH.
And that is Economic Migration makes the World a more unequal place and that increased competition for Jobs and Housing has a very different effect for the Rich and the Poorer sections of the community in the UK.
If you cant tell that basic truth how do you expect to win anyones trust or respect?

AGAIN! Every lefty I know acknowledges the truth "Economic Migration makes the World a more unequal place" and immigration benifits UK Capitalism, YOU refuse to acknowledge that truth, why? The fascists deny that "Economic Migration makes the World a more unequal place" and immigration benifits UK Capitalism, we counter that with the truth. We also add the truth that you fight divide and rule by fascists and capitalists by fighting for equality for all, thus denying the immigrants scapegoating and undercutting. A "national closed shop", so to speak. You parrot the fascists and tories wanting to stop immigration, instead of fighting for a labour solution, a "national closed shop".

 

[durruti02]

rmp3 .. you are agreeing with Tbaldy .. he supports the 'national closed shop'

and i am glad to see you do not agree with hanoi petes anti work class rant against the trade unions and closed shop .. 'right wing ' apparrently!!

it good that maggie done away with them then isn't it!!


It is hard to compare immigration and the closed shop as the closed shop went at the same time we got mass unemployment ..

i also don't think that there were the same levels/types of immigration when we had the closed shop .. first off we had full employment ( and a social democrat consensus) till the late 7ts so almost all immigrants were part of state growth strategies relating to both the public sector and private expanding companies

 

[TremulousTetra]

rmp3 .. you are agreeing with Tbaldy .. he supports the 'national closed shop'

and i am glad to see you do not agree with hanoi petes anti work class rant against the trade unions and closed shop .. 'right wing ' apparrently!!

it good that maggie done away with them then isn't it!!


It is hard to compare immigration and the closed shop as the closed shop went at the same time we got mass unemployment ..

i also don't think that there were the same levels/types of immigration when we had the closed shop .. first off we had full employment ( and a social democrat consensus) till the late 7ts so almost all immigrants were part of state growth strategies relating to both the public sector and private expanding companies

you haven't been reading have you? I have been agreeing with you and Mr Baldwin all the way through the thread about the neo-economic libralist. What's more on many occasions I have said, I don't know anybody who disagrees with you from the left about this agenda. It is your "nonsolution" we all disagree with.
I notice you didn't deal with, and possibly even read, with post 1170.

 

[durruti02]

you haven't been reading have you? I have been agreeing with you and Mr Baldwin all the way through the thread about the neo-economic libralist. What's more on many occasions I have said, I don't know anybody who disagrees with you from the left about this agenda. It is your "nonsolution" we all disagree with.
I notice you didn't deal with, and possibly even read, with post 1170.

oh i am sorry .. i do not live on urban! but yes i did know this and yes i had sort of forgotten!

but but most of the left continue to ignore the issue .. e.g. from hanoi pete to respect

but but but i really do disagree with you about the left .. maybe people are aware of these issues .. but they do not intervene in a productive way ..

by the way do you remember the RCP book Taking Control?? very relevant .. ( it's selling for 2 whole pounds and 38p on Tesco.com! )

 

[TremulousTetra]

oh i am sorry .. i do not live on urban! but yes i did know this and yes i had sort of forgotten!

so feel free to do so.

but but most of the left continue to ignore the issue .. e.g. from hanoi pete to respect

but but but i really do disagree with you about the left .. maybe people are aware of these issues .. but they do not intervene in a productive way ..

at last the concession, that baldys and your position is a caricature.

by the way do you remember the RCP book Taking Control?? very relevant .. ( it's selling for 2 whole pounds and 38p on Tesco.com! )

well done!

 

[exosculate]

Its not a caricature at all.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Its not a caricature at all.

Wow! What a well rounded argument. You have convinced me. I have got everything wrong. you have converted me. I am now a born-again anarchist!

 

[durruti02]

Wow! What a well rounded argument. You have convinced me. I have got everything wrong. you have converted me. I am now a born-again anarchist!

i am disappointed .. you are clearly bonkers if you think that you are portraying the true left!! self delusion of the highest order

as i pointed out if this was the true left how come the majority of w/c people regard you with contempt! and prefer the wankers of the bnp???

the left do not do the day to day things that are neccessary .. the idea of not standing on the sidelines ( except individuals in individual workplaces ) is anathema to the left .. much easier to try to flog the paper to a tiny minority

my and balders position ..a caricature??? .. sorry you really are living in cloud cookoo land .. if you can not see it than i am sorry .. i can say no more to you .. just look at the england flags .. just look at the bnp votes piling up .. just look at the racial fuck up that is respect .. if anything is a caricature it is the left

the idea that the left accept that immigration is an issue is bullshit .. you cannot think outside the box enough to see that unionisation leads to control of the workplace .. i.e. to jobs for local people .. to less immigration .. maybe under workers control there wioll be immigration of a differrent sort ..

the issue , as the left with their state orientated leninist politics can never understand, is control at the base

you have conned us into thinking you understood that immigration ( like right to buy, anti trade union laws, CCT Best Value and the changes in housing allocation) was a key component in the neo liberal offensive .. i genuinely thought that you had , like many in the SP ( perhaps influenced by their irish comades) finally accepted that we need to be honest about the issue ..

i think you have not and are not being honest .. but swp .. hey thats nothing new!

 

[TremulousTetra]

well I have to say I am disappointed too, instead of responding to posts I make directly to you, you respond to posts where I take the Mickey out of exo for his piss poor attempt at debating. I have the patience to go through the debate with you honestly, it is a shame you haven't responded in kind.

i am disappointed .. you are clearly bonkers if you think that you are portraying the true left!! self delusion of the highest order

haven't got a clue what you're talking about, I am not saying the SW is the true left.

as i pointed out if this was the true left how come the majority of w/c people regard you with contempt! and prefer the wankers of the bnp???

the left do not do the day to day things that are neccessary .. the idea of not standing on the sidelines ( except individuals in individual workplaces ) is anathema to the left .. much easier to try to flog the paper to a tiny minority.

I'm sorry to laugh, but it is difficult to take his caricature of what we do seriously. However, as I have already said the relationship of the working class to the revolutionary left is a different topic from the line the revolutionary left should take on immigration.

my and balders position ..a caricature??? .. sorry you really are living in cloud cookoo land .. if you can not see it than i am sorry .. i can say no more to you .. just look at the england flags .. just look at the bnp votes piling up .. just look at the racial fuck up that is respect .. if anything is a caricature it is the left

in my opinion, it is too simplistic and analysis to blame the rise in some aspects of right-wing politics on the left. The real story is far more complicated. I also think you exaggerate.

the idea that the left accept that immigration is an issue is bullshit .. you cannot think outside the box enough to see that unionisation leads to control of the workplace .. i.e. to jobs for local people .. to less immigration .. maybe under workers control there wioll be immigration of a differrent sort ..

the issue , as the left with their state orientated leninist politics can never understand, is control at the base

you have conned us into thinking you understood that immigration ( like right to buy, anti trade union laws, CCT Best Value and the changes in housing allocation) was a key component in the neo liberal offensive .. i genuinely thought that you had , like many in the SP ( perhaps influenced by their irish comades) finally accepted that we need to be honest about the issue ..

i think you have not and are not being honest .. but swp .. hey thats nothing new!

you haven't been reading have you? I have been agreeing with you and Mr Baldwin all the way through the thread about the neo-economic libralist. What's more on many occasions I have said, I don't know anybody who disagrees with you from the left about this agenda. the idea that capitalists will use anybody, women, immigrants, even children to undermine workers organisation/pay/terms and conditions is an absolute basic of Marxist analysis. You and Baldy are telling us nothing we do not accept. It is your "nonsolution" we all disagree with.

in fact I will throw out a challenge again, can you point to anybody in SW, or any of the other revolutionary left organisations who does not think that the Neo Liberals support immigration is not based on the assumption it will undermine the labour movement?

btw you need to reread the article you posted from the MP to understand how you are wrong about Tony Blair.

 

[exosculate]

well I have to say I am disappointed too, instead of responding to posts I make directly to you, you respond to posts where I take the Mickey out of exo for his piss poor attempt at debating. I have the patience to go through the debate with you honestly, it is a shame you haven't responded in kind.

What do you mean taking the piss? You state that something is caricatured without giving any decent argument as to why. I merely ironically copied your style, in true theatrical he's behind you, oh no he's not, oh yes he is style.

You take the piss out of yourself.

 

[exosculate]

Wow! What a well rounded argument. You have convinced me. I have got everything wrong. you have converted me. I am now a born-again anarchist!

And I am not an anarchist either.

 

[Hanoipete]

Your version of `socialaism`, basically state capitalism, is dead and you cant bring it back as it doesnt work. Even the left of the labour party had to fight the unions, the unions were/are right wing. most of them will scab on each other at the drop of a hat, the closed shop fucked over the poor, created trade cliques and was overtly racist on some cases, the dock strike being the most obvious.
I think its great to see you trot out cliches like "Liberal Supremacist", use bold and capitals to highlight your weak arguments.
The left missed a huge chance in the 60s and 70s to create a more equitable planet, to beat your right-wing allies to the punch over `globalisation` and head it off. Instead they fought over the crumbs, scabbing and betraying each other at every turn, the Electricians Union anyone, the support for the miners anyone? Unionism made great strides in the 30s-early50s. After then it became a rightist structure and your two dimensional thinking is a good example of it.

If you are so assured about how in touch with "the working clas" (hahah what a mug phrase that is, only muppets use it) then get out on the doorstep and show us...it was people like you who betrayed them the first time round, who are betraying them now in France et al and are the ones who opened up the way for the NF in the 70s and the BNP now. Useless gobbers who think they can tell everyone the shining path. I wanna see you get out of the street and sell your pamphlets.

Oh and by the way how does your economic programme differentiate from the BNPs?

 

[TremulousTetra]

What do you mean taking the piss? You state that something is caricatured without giving any decent argument as to why. I merely ironically copied your style, in true theatrical he's behind you, oh no he's not, oh yes he is style.

You take the piss out of yourself.

precisely, and that is why I've responded to you in kind.

I have never had a problem on this board admitting my inadequacies in communication. In fact I don't think I am providing any great revelation to say that forums seem to propagate misunderstanding. If you no wish to join in the discussion I have been having for six months with durtrito and Baldy, may I humbly suggest you try to develop honest discussion, instead of being sarcastic bastard.

I think I have already explained in the thread why I think their argument is a caricature, if you do not understand my explanation or wish me to expand, just ask, and I will try to make you understand.

 

[TremulousTetra]

And I am not an anarchist either.

I never, actually, said you was.

btw can you point to anybody in SW, or any of the other revolutionary left organisations who does not think that the Neo Liberals support for immigration is not based on the assumption it will undermine the labour movement?

 

[TremulousTetra]

snip

I obviously have my disagreements with you, which we could discuss later, but just to prove a point to these people, do you disagree with the main thesis of durs and Baldys argument that the neo-Liberals support immigration in order to undermine the labour movement?

 

[tbaldwin]

I obviously have my disagreements with you, which we could discuss later, but just to prove a point to these people, do you disagree with the main thesis of durs and Baldys argument that the neo-Liberals support immigration in order to undermine the labour movement?

RMP3 Not really sure what you mean about caricatures etc. But my arguement is not that neo liberals support free market migration policies intending to wreck the labour movement just that they have not seriously thought through the consequences of policies they support.
They are not really Socialist in any meaningful sense. They are not Internationalist and neither do they have a clear idea of how Ec Mig effects different classes.
You try to say that the Left actually agrees with me and Durruti about the consequences of Economic Migration nad how its used....BUT if that is true then why are they seen as the people who are most PRO IMMIGRATION?

 

[TremulousTetra]

RMP3 Not really sure what you mean about caricatures etc. But my arguement is not that neo liberals support free market migration policies intending to wreck the labour movement just that they have not seriously thought through the consequences of policies they support.
They are not really Socialist in any meaningful sense. They are not Internationalist and neither do they have a clear idea of how Ec Mig effects different classes.
You try to say that the Left actually agrees with me and Durruti about the consequences of Economic Migration nad how its used....BUT if that is true then why are they seen as the people who are most PRO IMMIGRATION?

first we need to clear some things up about your own argument. These are the neoliberals
also, look at the thread from dur on Karl Marx's view on immigration. He doesn't have a problem seeing immigration as a contributory factor to workers division, and yet being for open borders, does he?

right, let's not see this as an argument, but you have asked me a question, and so I expect you to try and understand honestly what I am saying. I am not saying you will have to agree with me, but at least you should be able to understand what I really think, instead of attacking some caricature.okay?

The real hardened Thatcherites (neoliberals) believe most beneficial to capitalism is a "free market" in Labour, just like any other commodity. A free market in Labour undermines the trade unions, undermines 'excessive' wage demands, and makes UK capitalism more competitive they say. These people have crunchef the numbers from a Conservative prospective, and they are saying in short, immigration is good for the UK. Britain PLC benefit economically from immigration. so, do we agree on what I have said so far?

 

[TremulousTetra]

so I ask durruti02 tbaldwin exosculate, to give me examples to substantiate and clarify their thesis, and what do you get? Nothing. Not only that, you suggest I'm "not being honest", when there could be no possible reason be dishonest, and you give no evidence to substantiate your accusations.

this is what I find so interminable and dishonest about the debating style of durruti02 tbaldwin exosculate. I'm sorry, but I do. I offer to sit down go through the debate, but you will not go beyond your strawman accusations. You will not back up your arguments with any hard facts and hard analysis. And what's worse you won't make any attempt whatsoever to try and understand that, my opinions, that you are attacking.

 

[tbaldwin]

The Hard Facts are these.

Countries like the UK are PLUNDERING developing countries of their most valuable resource Skilled workers.
Economic Migration also has negative consequences for Working Class people in the UK as it increases the competition for Jobs and Housing.
Despite this The Left are seen as PRO IMMIGRATION.

Name me any issue of SW etc that has an article arguing against immigration.

On one hand RMP3 you seem to be saying that yes you agree that Economic Migration is a bad thing but on the other you seem to saying that cant do anything about it or even publicly argue against it.

So what is it your saying?,im totally confused now.

How would you stop the flow of Economic migrants to richer countries would it be all carrott without any stick?

 

[exosculate]

precisely, and that is why I've responded to you in kind.

I have never had a problem on this board admitting my inadequacies in communication. In fact I don't think I am providing any great revelation to say that forums seem to propagate misunderstanding. If you no wish to join in the discussion I have been having for six months with durtrito and Baldy, may I humbly suggest you try to develop honest discussion, instead of being sarcastic bastard.

I think I have already explained in the thread why I think their argument is a caricature, if you do not understand my explanation or wish me to expand, just ask, and I will try to make you understand.

I do not see where you have made an adequate explanation of the aforementioned caricature. Please do explain it.

 

[exosculate]

I never, actually, said you was.

btw can you point to anybody in SW, or any of the other revolutionary left organisations who does not think that the Neo Liberals support for immigration is not based on the assumption it will undermine the labour movement?

Is that a double negative?

Any chance of a rephrasing?

 

[tbaldwin]

Your version of `socialaism`, basically state capitalism, is dead and you cant bring it back as it doesnt work. Even the left of the labour party had to fight the unions, the unions were/are right wing. most of them will scab on each other at the drop of a hat, the closed shop fucked over the poor, created trade cliques and was overtly racist on some cases, the dock strike being the most obvious.
I think its great to see you trot out cliches like "Liberal Supremacist", use bold and capitals to highlight your weak arguments.
The left missed a huge chance in the 60s and 70s to create a more equitable planet, to beat your right-wing allies to the punch over `globalisation` and head it off. Instead they fought over the crumbs, scabbing and betraying each other at every turn, the Electricians Union anyone, the support for the miners anyone? Unionism made great strides in the 30s-early50s. After then it became a rightist structure and your two dimensional thinking is a good example of it.

If you are so assured about how in touch with "the working clas" (hahah what a mug phrase that is, only muppets use it) then get out on the doorstep and show us...it was people like you who betrayed them the first time round, who are betraying them now in France et al and are the ones who opened up the way for the NF in the 70s and the BNP now. Useless gobbers who think they can tell everyone the shining path. I wanna see you get out of the street and sell your pamphlets.

Oh and by the way how does your economic programme differentiate from the BNPs?

HP. I would describe myself as an Authoritarian Socialist which i would argue is way to the Left of most of the Liberal Left who hold the views of ordinary people in such contempt.
I want to see the majority given the authority to impose their views on the rich and the Liberal Supremacists.
Saying i have betrayed people is a strange arguement and i cant really work out what your trying to get at.
I dont give a shit about the BNPs economic programme they are Nazi twats.
And i hate them and the people like the open borders brigade who help them.

 

[Ryazan]

Immigrants should be absorbed into working class organisation and struggles, not working class organisation reacting against them. Utter stupidity. Immigrant labour will come here, they are needed by the requirements of a lot of employers, and yes they do compete with workers here for low paying jobs, but I would rather show solidarity with an unskilled/skilled worker from another country, in gaining changes to working and living conditions, through unionisation etc, than pandering to the middle classes you claim to despise. The negative affects of immigration on working class organisation might be something employers want, through division, but keeping immigrants out is not going to happen. Employers want low paid workers. And they should be on our side, to kick the employers in the teeth.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Hello Baldy & exosculate;

The Hard Facts are these.
Countries like the UK are PLUNDERING developing countries of their most valuable resource Skilled workers.

once again, I do not know anybody from the "open Borders brigade" on the left, who would disagree with this. All the way through from Karl Marx to Socialist-Worker. (exo this is part of the caricature I am talking about. The strawman argument if you want. I have tackled this argument by explaining the left accepts this view between 10 and 40 times.)

Economic Migration also has negative consequences for Working Class people in the UK as it increases the competition for Jobs and Housing.

the general thrust of your argument Marxist's accept, as you can see from the comments of Karl Marx reproduced by Durrito on the topic. I think I have also mentioned to you a very good film on the topic, "The Killing Floor", a study of a American slaughterhouse labour relations in the time of several waves of economic migrants. However, we wouldn't say the deleterious effects are just a product of migrant labour, we would place that migration in a social context and say that the deleterious byproducts existed only because of the class relationships of capitalism.(Exo, as above.)

Despite this The Left are seen as PRO IMMIGRATION.

That is not actually true. We are against the penalisation of immigrants, thus against immigration and border controls which penalise migrants economic or otherwise. this does not mean we are not also against the enforced migration through economics. (Exo, as above.)

Name me any issue of SW etc that has an article arguing against immigration.

I don't think there will be any arguments from the SW for the penalisation of migrants. But they're very well maybe articles to outline the deleterious effects the migration of some of the more skilled labour from developing countries has on those countries. And I am sure there are many studies, such as that of "the killing floor"

On one hand RMP3 you seem to be saying that yes you agree that Economic Migration is a bad thing but on the other you seem to saying that cant do anything about it or even publicly argue against it.

So what is it your saying?,im totally confused now.

How would you stop the flow of Economic migrants to richer countries would it be all carrott without any stick?

you are absolutely right, there is indeed a contradiction at the heart of the Marxist argument on immigration. On the one hand Marxist do accept there can be deleterious consequences from immigration, economic migrants. On the other hand, we do NOT think it is POSSIBLE or even desirable to stop or penalise immigrants. If you do not attack the Marxist argument with recognition of this contradiction, you are not attacking what I and many others on the left really think, you are attacking a caricature, on a strawman argument of your own creation Baldy.

(okay Exo?)

 

[TremulousTetra]

I do not see where you have made an adequate explanation of the aforementioned caricature. Please do explain it.

See Post 1199.