Immigration .. part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism??

[tbaldwin]

The thing with the term Libertarian is its fucking shite. I have no problem with Gays but would like to see Violent child molesters and rapists dealt with a lot more severely by the courts of shame, does this make me a Libertarian/Authoritarian or the poll shit?

 

[Isambard]

Well all the answers count towards the final score, if you answer 15/20 in a more authoritarian way then that is going to be reflected in your final score. It's a scale, not a yes/no thing.

I mean look at where Tony Blair ends up. Clearly on the authoritarians side despite the fact for example his attitudes are "ok".

 

[mentalchik]

.

There is no way you can justify single people staying in large properties when families with children are crying out for properties and are living in hostels. Of course the overall answer is a massive building programme for council housing. As it goes, if things carry on they way they are going, there won’t be any council housing left by 2010.

As someone who will be technically 'homeless' soon and is trying to get through the morass of red tape etc needed to get through to just get on the housing list, i can agree with this.

Had an interview with the council last week and the very nice guy i spoke to told me the system is so overloaded that it will only be a few years till there is no council provision at all !

(mutters about the right to buy)

Even though i have a dependant child there is no quick solution and i'm sorry to say that having had a brush with this i can see why some people get very angry about it all.........

 

[john malcolm]

it is obvious to all but that left that the immigration of the last few years is an intregal part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism .. i.e. that the project to destroy the unions and cut wages thru privatisation etc etc could not have been acheived without this new wave of immigration ... show me how this is not true ..

Ireland
Irish Ferries’ slave labour

Strike action needed now
Stephen Boyd, Socialist Party, Ireland

Eamonn Rothwell, the Managing Director of Irish Ferries, who is trying to sack 543 workers and replace them with migrant workers from Eastern Europe, earned €687,000 last year. In fact he got a pay rise of €35,000 in 2004. That is approximately €20,000 more than what he intends to pay his "galley slaves" for a whole year. One last statistic - this man who claims that his company needs to replace unionised labour with migrants on slave wages in order to stay competitive earned more than 45 times the wages he proposes to give one of his new workers!

Neither the government nor IBEC are complaining about his wages. No, once again it is the "lower orders" (as one commentator called them) that are being made to suffer for the profits of big business.

Bertie Ahern feigned interest in the plight of the Irish Ferries workers when he declared that the company was engaged in sharp practice. The truth is that Bertie Ahern and his PD coalition partners support what Irish Ferries are doing. This government have consciously encouraged migrant workers to come to Ireland not just because there is a labour shortage but also so that big business can exploit and use them to drive down the wages of all workers. Tom Parlon the Minister of State at the Department of Finance said that the prospective new employees of Irish Ferries would be better off than they would be in their own country because they would be getting €3.50 an hour and board and lodging!

 

[rioted]

Do those people who blame the lack of social housing on immigrants support the "right to buy"? If the working class weren't so keen on it, there'd be a larger stock.

 

[TremulousTetra]

it is obvious to all but that left that the immigration of the last few years is an intregal part of neo liberalism/Thatcherism .. i.e. that the project to destroy the unions and cut wages thru privatisation etc etc could not have been acheived without this new wave of immigration ... show me how this is not true ..

precisely who, can you name names, has disagreed with you about this from the left?I think this is some kind of self-delusion you have.
It is obvious to everybody, including the left, that the economic liberalist have sought to use immigrants as a reserve army of labour, so to speak. That is not the point of discussion, the point of discussion is, how does anti racists lining up with the Thatcher and the fascists on immigration do anything to increase unionisation, wages, and stop privatisation?


ResistanceMP3.

 

[tbaldwin]

Do those people who blame the lack of social housing on immigrants support the "right to buy"? If the working class weren't so keen on it, there'd be a larger stock.

Thats a bit of a red herring. Unless you think that a London of 10 million + people is desirable or sustainable?
There simply is not enough room in London for all the people that would like to live there.
And no one is blaming immigrants just arguing against economic migration.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Immigration is part of the problem not the solution. Nobody has argued that is the whole problem.
If you want to win working class unity i think its best to do it on the basis of honesty. And the truth is economic migration makes the world a more unequal place.

I haven't argued it is part of the solution, in fact I have argued there isn't a solution, that the scarcity and inequality are innate to capitalism. I am not going to argue that scarcity and inequality in Britain is created by immigration, because it isn't. However,I totally agree with you, as does everybody I know in the SWP, that immigration makes the world a more unequal place. It is exactly that point I make to people who make racist arguments about immigration that immigrants are a drain on Britain, the converse is true, immigrants are a drain on other countries, and in capitalist terms a benefit to Britain as you point out.

so it remains, the question everybody is avoiding. How would banning immigration be part of any increase of unionisation, wages, and stopping privatisation etc?



ResistanceMP3

 

[tbaldwin]

I haven't argued it is part of the solution, in fact I have argued there isn't a solution, that the scarcity and inequality are innate to capitalism. I am not going to argue that scarcity and inequality in Britain is created by immigration, because it isn't. However,I totally agree with you, as does everybody I know in the SWP, that immigration makes the world a more unequal place. It is exactly that point I make to people who make racist arguments about immigration that immigrants are a drain on Britain, the converse is true, immigrants are a drain on other countries, and in capitalist terms a benefit to Britain as you point out.

so it remains, the question everybody is avoiding. How would banning immigration be part of any increase of unionisation, wages, and stopping privatisation etc?



ResistanceMP3

Thanks for another interesting contribution RPM 3.
I would answer you question with the following.
If You recognise that "economic migration makes the world a more unequal place" Do you argue for it or against it?
I think the anaswers obvious. And it doesnt mean siding with racists,it means confronting their arguements head on and honestly.
The left has to start to reconnect with Working Class people. If it is not prepared to tell the truth on this issue and come out firmly against economic migration it will never be trusted by millions of working class people who will simply not buy Liberal arguements on migration.
Workers internationally should argue for International Labour Laws and improving the conditions of Workers Internationally. Not argue for the rights of a small minority of people to have the freedom to live wherever they like.
That would do more for Union organisation and anti privatisation than the Left have done for years.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Thanks for another interesting contribution RPM 3.
I would answer you question with the following.
If You recognise that "economic migration makes the world a more unequal place" Do you argue for it or against it?
I think the anaswers obvious. And it doesnt mean siding with racists,it means confronting their arguements head on and honestly.
The left has to start to reconnect with Working Class people. If it is not prepared to tell the truth on this issue and come out firmly against economic migration it will never be trusted by millions of working class people who will simply not buy Liberal arguements on migration.
Workers internationally should argue for International Labour Laws and improving the conditions of Workers Internationally. Not argue for the rights of a small minority of people to have the freedom to live wherever they like.
That would do more for Union organisation and anti privatisation than the Left have done for years.

There is no "if you recognise" about it. I don't know anybody on the left who does not recognise that developed countries are raping less developed countries of skilled labour. And there isn't any dishonesty either. As I said in my last post, this argument is one of the key arguments socialist worker comrades will use against the racist argument that immigrants are a drain on Britains economy. So if you are demanding the left be honest, the least you can do is be honest and recognise what the left are saying. Nobody has as far as I can see denied that developed countries are raping less developed countries of skilled labour, and so making the world more unequal, and has not been honest about this fact when having discussions with people.

Now, it does not automatically follow that you recognise this injustice and then a compound this injustice by perpetrating another injustice. The hegemony on the immigration discussion does not lie with the noble antiracist, only concerned about the inequality that economic migration creates on the international stage, the hegemony lies with the national issues of wages, housing, health provision, education etc. and so with the Tories and fascist. And if the left is going to reconnect with working-class people it has to be honest and say problems in housing, health provision, education wages etc does not lie with immigration, but with the way the society is run. This is the fourth richest country in the world, and the only reason there is any shortages in any of those areas is because the way people have DECIDED to follow Thatcherite economic policies. Banning immigration will do nothing to change this situation in Britain.

Now you are right that Millions of ordinary people may not buy revolutionary arguments on immigration. This is because the dominant ideas in any society have always been those of the ruling class. And when antiracist back up the arguments of the ruling class with liberal arguments about international inequality, they do nothing to undermine the situation. There are no shortcuts, revolutionaries have to be honest, responsibility for scarcities and inequalities do not lie with immigrants, they lie with capitalism.

Resistance MP3.

PS. I wholeheartedly agree with you about international workers organisation. And if I were a socialist in a developing country I might well argue for barriers being placed upon international employers stealing workers who are trained/skilled in my country.but as a British worker, I think we should start that process in Britain. I think we should strengthen trade union organisation, wages terms and conditionsso that all workers indigenous and immigrant receive the same, and so cannot be played at one group off against another. this is purely from practical reasons. If we cannot achieve in Britain, how can we possibly achieve it internationally?

 

[tbaldwin]

The hegemony on the immigration discussion does not lie with the noble antiracist, only concerned about the inequality that economic migration creates on the international stage, the hegemony lies with the national issues of wages, housing, health provision, education etc. and so with the Tories and fascist. QUOTE]


For me this is a crucial thing you and the SWP etc are caught up in an arguement that is Nationalist and Liberal. It seeks to ignore the very real concerns people have, who are competing with migrants for Jobs and Housing.
And it also practically ignores the dire consequences of economic migration on developing countries.

At the heart of this issue the lack of Class Politics and the Lack of anything approaching genuine Internationalism is being exposed.

The dominant ideas on migration can not be simply dismissed as those of the ruling class. It is just too easy to fall for that. But the truth is what you say are revolutionary arguements are nothing of the sort,they are weak,liberal and ultimately dishonest.

 

[Isambard]

There simply is not enough room in London for all the people that would like to live there.

Yes, Britain needs a decent regional policy.

But again you've fallen right into the trap of thinking that resources are natually scarce. YES, London can seem "too full" if you are living in a tiny crappy flat that costs more than you can afford. How many square metres does Liz Windsor have in her publicly financed housing?

 

[tbaldwin]

If you manage to evict Liz give me a call,Might be better of starting by squatting Tony Benns massive West London House though...

 

[Isambard]

If you manage to evict Liz give me a call,Might be better of starting by squatting Tony Benns massive West London House though...

Where are the 2 contradictory? Where did I say it was OK for politicians to live in big houses?

However I find it extremely indicative that you think a politician (who, whatever his faults was amongst some of the least worst) should be a better example than the Windsors. Is it becuase Benn doesn't agree with your "Dear Leader" ?

-----------------------------

I was having a think about the housing issue over the weekend.
Where I live a lot of the indigenous white working class is leaving the area because suitable housing is becoming less and less available.

My council ward is about 30% immigrants so does the thesis that it is immigrants that “steal” the housing stand up?

No. Most of those moving into my area are middle class well to do indigenous whites.
They are not even younguns looking for their first flat share but a moneyed stratum of society that while culturally contributing very little want to “consume” a vibrant inner city area.

Why is this happening? Privatisation of social housing, conversion of smaller flats into large “luxury flats”, massive increase in rents in the private sector.

It really came home to me when I realised that of the 4 closest pubs to me, only 1 remains. The others have been “baaaah-ified”.

 

[reallyoldhippy]

Really service industry jobs would go abroad - tell me how does one outsource cleaning, cooking or carrying bricks around building sites?

Carrying bricks, you might have a point. But if builders can't make a profit here, they'll build abroad. They're not in it for our need, you know. As for the service industry - how many people go abroad for holidays? Why? 'cos they're cheap. Housemaids in Marmaris undercutting housemaids in Margate.

And the knocking down of housing in the North has little to do with acute housing shortage elsewhere.

Of course it has - it's about economic migration!

Council housing however is now more oversubscribed than ever by people from abroad - with no increase in stock. Whats that Mrs Patel you have to wait another 3 years for that transfer - don't worry its the world capitalist system thats causing that. Oh - OK then.

Is this a Mrs Patel who's not from abroad? Are you advocating a "sons and daughters" policy - the Royal family to keep Buckingham Palace in perpetuity, perhaps? Whats that Mrs Begum? no we can't move you or your asmatic kids and arthritic grandmother out of your damp, crumbling, over-crowded hovel because the council house is reserved for a young fit "local" couple.

 

[TremulousTetra]

Mr Baldwin if you just want to name call me, and the SWP, that's fair enough, but if you want your argument to make any sense you need to explain how you come to your startling conclusions.

I am basically arguing that the scarcity and inequality that exists in British society is due to the class system, capitalism. So how is this not a class analysis? You on the other hand want to argue they exist, or at least are compounded by, immigration. How is this a class analysis?

Resistance MP3.

PS. I'm not ignoring your other points, but I need to establish some basic understandings of your argument first.

 

[exosculate]

Serious question for tbaldwin and to a certain extent exosculate:
Have you done the Political Compass? What was your score?

I scored highly as a left libertarian - which is what I am, though the compass is too simplistic to take onboard the subtle nuances of reality politics in my view.

 

[Isambard]

the subtle nuances of reality politics in my view.

Such as?

I'd suggest that people use the term "real world" etc to justify moving their position to one that is more conservativve.

 

[exosculate]

Exosulate, like Mr Baldwin, you are creating divisions between me and you that don't exist. I agree with all you have to say in post #655. Of course the rate of scarcity of working-class people varies within capitalism. Of course in the post-war era working class people were comparatively better off than they had been in other times. And crucially, of course the level of scarcity working-class people suffer is dependent upon the level of pressure from below. That is my whole point, that we need to solidify, and unite the pressure from below. My question to both you and Mr T. Baldwin is, how does backing from an anti racist position backing the demands of the right for immigration controls, unite the working class to create pressure in the here and now, for gains in the here and now? (Forget revolution. This question is about creating working-class unity now!)

Yes we agree on more than we disagree. Its about tactics in the here and now for improving things - this is where we are disagreeing. Are you really advocating a no borders position now? If not what are you advocating? Do you really believe mass immigration now will increase working class unity?

 

[exosculate]

Such as?

I'd suggest that people use the term "real world" etc to justify moving their position to one that is more conservativve.

No its about engaging with reality and not with small cliquey backslapping groups.

 

[TremulousTetra]

I scored highly as a left libertarian - which is what I am, though the compass is too simplistic to take onboard the subtle nuances of reality politics in my view.

Exosulate, like Mr Baldwin, you are creating divisions between me and you that don't exist. I agree with all you have to say in post #655. Of course the rate of scarcity of working-class people varies within capitalism. Of course in the post-war era working class people were comparatively better off than they had been in other times. And crucially, of course the level of scarcity working-class people suffer is dependent upon the level of pressure from below. That is my whole point, that we need to solidify, and unite the pressure from below. My question to both you and Mr T. Baldwin is, how does backing from an anti racist position the demands of the right for immigration controls, unite the working class to create pressure in the here and now, for gains in the here and now? (Forget revolution. This question is about creating working-class unity now!)

ResistanceMP3.

PS. The rate of scarcity, exploitation, does vary within capitalism, but scarcity, exploitation, is innate to the system. And it is this central contradiction of the system, that creates its own gravedigger. BUT, whether this contradictions achievement socialism or barbarism is around the corner, is irrelevant to the strategy of how we fight back today imho.

 

[Isambard]

No its about engaging with reality and not with small cliquey backslapping groups.

Both feet in reality thanks. I can see my white indigenous working class neighbours being driven out of the housing not by immigrants but by the white indigenous middle classes, privatisation, gentrification and rising rents.

I am not a member of any political organsation.

 

[exosculate]

Well

Carrying bricks, you might have a point. But if builders can't make a profit here, they'll build abroad. They're not in it for our need, you know. As for the service industry - how many people go abroad for holidays? Why? 'cos they're cheap. Housemaids in Marmaris undercutting housemaids in Margate.

Theres a whole building and maintenance industry in this country - you cant move someones house abroad to have it repaired. You are simplifying that far too much. There are many reasons so many people go abroad these days one being because of artificially low aviation fuel, which does not have environmental damage costs factored into it. But thats a whole other argument. I do appreciate basic supply and demand economics - although much modern macro economics is about false subsidisation as much as anything else.

Of course it has - it's about economic migration!

You don't appear to be following your own arguments. Of course housing demand is connected to economic prosperity - that is too obvious to be stated. Immigrants will naturally gravitate to the areas with greater economic prosperity - putting more pressure on areas that already have acute housing problems. I argued that low demand areas where buildings are being knocked down do not come into this as it is the areas with the worst housing shortages that are impacted upon the greatest. This is why areas where large immigration occurs can do nothing other than wind up the existing population who are already fed up with the lack of affordable housing.


Is this a Mrs Patel who's not from abroad? Are you advocating a "sons and daughters" policy - the Royal family to keep Buckingham Palace in perpetuity, perhaps? Whats that Mrs Begum? no we can't move you or your asmatic kids and arthritic grandmother out of your damp, crumbling, over-crowded hovel because the council house is reserved for a young fit "local" couple.

Mrs Patel is English for this purpose and non white and her transfer is being held up for the sake of argument by Polish white people. I am arguing for localism not based on 'race' - I make no bones about it. Whilst advocating for greater building of affordable housing - which no big political party is advocating and so it is not going to happen anytime soon. You are arguing for the powder keg - along with very few others I am happy to say.

 

[exosculate]

Both feet in reality thanks.

I am not a member of any political organsation.

Good to hear it.

 

[Isambard]

"no we can't move you or your asmatic kids and arthritic grandmother out of your damp, crumbling, over-crowded hovel because the council house is reserved for a young fit "local" couple."


Taking the names out of it , can you not see exosculate that a "sons and daughters" housing policy would result in those whose need is greater being worse off?

 

[exosculate]

"no we can't move you or your asmatic kids and arthritic grandmother out of your damp, crumbling, over-crowded hovel because the council house is reserved for a young fit "local" couple."


Taking the names out of it , can you not see exosculate that a "sons and daughters" housing policy would result in those whose need is greater being worse off?

Sons and daughters? I'm arguing acute housing need is being bypassed as it is.

 

[exosculate]

"no we can't move you or your asmatic kids and arthritic grandmother out of your damp, crumbling, over-crowded hovel because the council house is reserved for a young fit "local" couple."


Taking the names out of it , can you not see exosculate that a "sons and daughters" housing policy would result in those whose need is greater being worse off?

Could you state your position - are you advocating open borders and if not what are you advocating?

 

[Isambard]

I'm arguing acute housing need is being bypassed as it is.

Yes acute housing need is being bypassed becasue thse with the acute -est need get the houses.

Woman I know, white indigenous working class.
Used to sell herself at down at the station to get the money to inject heroin.
But she managed to get herself sorted out and her life together.

She got thrown out of the block of flats she lived in round the corner from mine when they were privitised.
They all got done up. Who's living in the flats there now? Immigrants? No, white indigenous middle class.

Where is she now? Yup, turning tricks for junk.

------------------------

I believe in "no borders" as part of general change of society on a worldwide basis.

In current society where I have the choice between being on the side of migrant workers or the police, bureaucrats and the racists,
I think I'll know which side I'll choose.

The problems in current society come from the system not becasue my Polish mate works in a chip shop!

 

[tbaldwin]

Mr Baldwin if you just want to name call me, and the SWP, that's fair enough, but if you want your argument to make any sense you need to explain how you come to your startling conclusions.

I am basically arguing that the scarcity and inequality that exists in British society is due to the class system, capitalism. So how is this not a class analysis? You on the other hand want to argue they exist, or at least are compounded by, immigration. How is this a class analysis?

Resistance MP3.

PS. I'm not ignoring your other points, but I need to establish some basic understandings of your argument first.

Thanks RPM3,
I appreciate you have tried to engage in the debate without insisting people like me are Daily mail scum etc so apologies if i have been doing too much name calling.
My startling conclusion as you put it. Flows from what you have acknowledged that "economic migration makes the world a more unequal place"
If you accept that the thing to do is say it and campaign against it.
Surely that is just being consistent and honest.

What i meant by a lack of Class analysis is that migration has different effects on different people.
Some benefit from increased rents and lower wages and some don't,to say the least!!!
So it is a Class question but also a question of Internationalism.

 

[exosculate]

Yes acute housing need is being bypassed becasue thse with the acute -est need get the houses.

Woman I know, white indigenous working class.
Used to sell herself at down at the station to get the money to inject heroin.
But she managed to get herself sorted out and her life together.

She got thrown out of the block of flats she lived in round the corner from mine when they were privitised.
They all got done up. Who's living in the flats there now? Immigrants? No, white indigenous middle class.

Where is she now? Yup, turning tricks for junk.

------------------------


I believe in "no borders" as part of general change of society on a worldwide basis.

In current society where I have the choice between being on the side of migrant workers or the police, bureaucrats and the racists,
I think I'll know which side I'll choose.

The problems in current society come from the system not becasue my Polish mate works in a chip shop!

So you are not answering the question - open borders now or not? If not - then which migrants are you on the side of? What percentage? Any particular preferences?