Immigration .. part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism??

[hibee]

You didn't, which I why I said I think you should be careful of "how you say things". Saying "compared to many, many other societies, racism in Britain is not all that strong", could well come across as underplaying the huge problems of racism in the UK. If you don't think so, we can agree to disagree.

There's a strange tendency among many on these boards to insist you "clarify" your posts lest your arguments be misinterpreted. I was asked to do this on the integration thread, although even a cursory glance at my posting history would show I'm not a racist.

Why people are so nervous about what one lefty says to another bunch of lefties on the subject of race? Apart from the fact genuine fash posters tend to get banned fairly quickly, we all know what everyone else means; do people fear that dreadlocked Brixtonites are going to join the Front en masse because someone wasn't careful about "how they say things"?

 

[LLETSA]

Dangerous Talk Costs Lives (but not on an internet forum)

As said, I didn't say you did.

Why keep going on about my 'dangerous talk' then?

 

[cockneyrebel]

and in a society that claimed to be-and did in a very real sense and in many areas-raising the non-Russian peoples of the USSR to a parity with the Russians, both economically and culturally.

That sentence comes across as a bit clumsy.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Why people are so nervous about what one lefty says to another bunch of lefties on the subject of race? Apart from the fact genuine fash posters tend to get banned fairly quickly, we all know what everyone else means; do people fear that dreadlocked Brixtonites are going to join the Front en masse because someone wasn't careful about "how they say things"?

I think you're reading too much into it. I intervented because someone had already picked up LLETSA on how it might come across.

And as it goes I do think some posters do underestimate how bad racism is. Like when Joe made his comments on the New Orleans thread.

But who said anything about anyone being a racist

Do you think that dreadlocked Brixtonites are joining the Front then? Shocking.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Why keep going on about my 'dangerous talk' then?

I didn't, I said agree to disagree.

 

[Epicurus]

There's a strange tendency among many on these boards to insist you "clarify" your posts lest your arguments be misinterpreted. I was asked to do this on the integration thread, although even a cursory glance at my posting history would show I'm not a racist.

But isn’t it the case that this is board not a conversation so it is far easier on here to be misunderstood, if I am speaking to someone I will often ask they to clarify what they mean, I never insist I just ask.

Just have a look at the thread what is meant by the term working class, it seems to mean 101 different things to people.

 

[hibee]

I think you're reading too much into it. I intervented because someone had already picked up LLETSA on how it might come across.

And as it goes I do think some posters do underestimate how bad racism is. Like when Joe made his comments on the New Orleans thread.

But who said anything about anyone being a racist

Do you think that dreadlocked Brixtonites are joining the Front then? Shocking.

Well my whole point is that they won't.

I don't notice this anxiety about "how you might come across" with any other subject. Much of the left really seem to fear this debate.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Well my whole point is that they won't.

I was joking!

Much of the left really seem to fear this debate.

I'm shaking at my computer as I type.....

 

[hibee]

But isn’t it the case that this is board not a conversation so it is far easier on here to be misunderstood, if I am speaking to someone I will often ask they to clarify what they mean, I never insist I just ask.

Just have a look at the thread what is meant by the term working class, it seems to mean 101 different things to people.

You may well be an exception but I don't notice other posters doing the same with any other subject. There seems to be this paranoia about other people sounding like they might be racists when we all know perfectly well they aren't.

 

[Epicurus]

Much of the left really seem to fear this debate.

I don’t know a great deal about the “Left” in the UK (but I’m learning) but from what I see on this board the “left” doesn’t seem to have a problem discussing it here, I don’t understand your point.

 

[LLETSA]

I think you're reading too much into it. I intervented because someone had already picked up LLETSA on how it might come across.

'Intervented'? No such word. Clumsy.


I've said it before, but, tsk, the standard of Trot you're finding nowadays.

 

[LLETSA]

And as it goes I do think some posters do underestimate how bad racism is. Like when Joe made his comments on the New Orleans thread.

All right, all right, I'll make myself clear: racism is bad.

And naughty. Very naughty.

Whoever it comes from, white or black.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Whoever it comes from, white or black.

Could get into a discussion here about the difference between racial bigotry and the ideology of racism backed up by imperialism/capitalism. But probably not a good idea.

I've said it before, but, tsk, the standard of Trot you're finding nowadays.

Well with your standards slipping, I think we're on the verge of the abyss....

As it goes that was a typo. My touch typing skills slipping.....(60 wpm don't you know).

 

[LLETSA]

cockney getting excited at the thought of racism danger!

I'm shaking at my computer as I type.....

Well put it away and zip up, before your supervisor comes in!

 

[cockneyrebel]

Well put it away and zip up, before your supervisor comes in!

Do you mind. How uncouth.

 

[Epicurus]

Define institutionalised racism and point towards some answers to it.

Institutional racism is that which, covertly or overtly, resides in the policies, procedures, operations and culture of public or private institutions - reinforcing individual prejudices and being reinforced by them in turn.

And you deal with it by confronting it head on and directly

 

[hibee]

I don’t know a great deal about the “Left” in the UK (but I’m learning) but from what I see on this board the “left” doesn’t seem to have a problem discussing it here, I don’t understand your point.

Well, this board does have a few people prepared to ask difficult questions. It is not representative of the left as a whole, although this is a fairly recent development; a few months ago I was accused of "subconscious" racism by Fisher Gate for daring to suggest that by directing their campaign at one ethnic/religious group Respect were playing a dangerous game. Rebel Warrior said I "shouldn't be surprised" at this. Neither of them has ever apologised or retracted, by the way.

Involve yourself in the UK left and you will quickly find any debate on the subject is non-existent; a view of race realtions preserved in aspic from 20 or 30 years ago is not to be questioned lest one find oneself accused of racism. Recently there has been some debate about whether the official version of anti racism is working, but in the main the left are so terrified of engaging with the subject that they fall back on a definition of anti racism that is in fact liberal, anti socialist and devoid of a class analysis. As someone who lives in a part of London with one of the highest rates of immigration in the country it becomes clear to me that their discourse has absolutely no resonance in the real world among either black or white people.

 

[Belushi]

As someone who lives in a part of London with one of the highest rates of immigration in the country it becomes clear to me that their discourse has absolutely no resonance in the real world among either black or white people.

Innit, do the swappies still stick to their 'only whites can be racist' line?

 

[hibee]

Innit, do the swappies still stick to their 'only whites can be racist' line?

Here you go - he's not a Swappie, just "one of the better trots":

Could get into a discussion here about the difference between racial bigotry and the ideology of racism backed up by imperialism/capitalism. But probably not a good idea.

 

[belboid]

As someone who lives in a part of London with one of the highest rates of immigration in the country it becomes clear to me that their discourse has absolutely no resonance in the real world among either black or white people.

it's funny, but as someone living in the part of Sheffield with the highest rates of immigration, I find the arguments put forward by us (including no immigration controls) has had a significant resonance amongst black and white workers here. As could be noted by the fact that in the last local elections, the Socialist Alliance candidate standing on such a platform received one of the best left votes in the country (14%) - not an overwhelming 'mandate' for sure, but significantly higher than one would expect if your analysis were compleely correct.

 

[cockneyrebel]

Innit, do the swappies still stick to their 'only whites can be racist' line?

But did the SWP ever say that white people can't be racist? That's totally different from distinguishing between racists and "racism" as an ideology that's comes out of and is backed up by imperialism. Even then, it would just apply to "white countries" as Japan is imperialist.

 

[LLETSA]

Institutional racism is that which, covertly or overtly, resides in the policies, procedures, operations and culture of public or private institutions - reinforcing individual prejudices and being reinforced by them in turn.

And you deal with it by confronting it head on and directly

What does all that mean in concrete terms?

 

[LLETSA]

it's funny, but as someone living in the part of Sheffield with the highest rates of immigration, I find the arguments put forward by us (including no immigration controls) has had a significant resonance amongst black and white workers here. As could be noted by the fact that in the last local elections, the Socialist Alliance candidate standing on such a platform received one of the best left votes in the country (14%) - not an overwhelming 'mandate' for sure, but significantly higher than one would expect if your analysis were compleely correct.

I bet that 'no immigration controls' was not the issue that was at the forefront of the minds of those who voted for you.

Not that it should have been, as it would mean that you were campaigning on something that you have no way whatsoever of influencing.

 

[Knotted]

I've no doubt you are not trying to scapegoat immigrants, however that is the inevitable consequence of an argument that says there are 'too many immigrants' here.

There is subtle but important difference between saying that there
are too many immigrants and saying that the rate at which they
are coming into the country is too high. Its not where they're from that's important.

One of the things that I have not noticed being picked up on is the
tendency of immigrants to be here on a temporary basis and who
consequently have little desire to join a union. They're certainly not
going to be concerned about pensions. I think part of the problem
is that too many immigrants leave.

 

[Belushi]

I bet that'no immigration controls was not the issue that was at the forefront of the minds of those who voted for you.

I cant imagine no immigration controls being much of votewinner among the black people I know let alone the white.

 

[hibee]

it's funny, but as someone living in the part of Sheffield with the highest rates of immigration, I find the arguments put forward by us (including no immigration controls) has had a significant resonance amongst black and white workers here. As could be noted by the fact that in the last local elections, the Socialist Alliance candidate standing on such a platform received one of the best left votes in the country (14%) - not an overwhelming 'mandate' for sure, but significantly higher than one would expect if your analysis were compleely correct.

And how about in the other 99.9% of the country?

 

[belboid]

I bet that 'no immigration controls' was not the issue that was at the forefront of the minds of those who voted for you.

Not that it should have been, as it would mean that you were campaigning on something that you have no way whatsoever of influencing.

very true - the thrust of our argmuents were about what we could explicitly control, and the no immigration controls was merely stuck on the back in a kind of 'where we stand'.

However, it was an argumwent we had made in many campaigns over the years, and it clearly didn't put many people off voting for us. Which would seem to contradict the notion that we must support imigration controls in order to be listened to.

 

[belboid]

And how about in the other 99.9% of the country?

what about it? I dont think our area is that unique.

 

[hibee]

very true - the thrust of our argmuents were about what we could explicitly control, and the no immigration controls was merely stuck on the back in a kind of 'where we stand'.

However, it was an argumwent we had made in many campaigns over the years, and it clearly didn't put many people off voting for us. Which would seem to contradict the notion that we must support imigration controls in order to be listened to.

I never said you must. In fact I wasn't even talking about immigration.

 

[belboid]

it has been said by others tho, throughout the thread. It is what the thread is notionally about.