Immigration "small benefit" to UK
- Thread starter Dhimmi
- Start date
This is clearly bollocks. I give a real world example (traffic warden) and you launch off into your predictablospiel, adding nothing substantive.
You could address that example with specific insights from your own experience or add something reality based of your own, but your preference is to seemingly deal in vacuous oversimplifications and routine slurs.
dont hold your breath
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
GET TO FUCKdear oh dear ffs MC you do fuck up so sometimes
please show / qoute / point to where i have said anything that is anti immigrant or apologise now .. please
Bollocks!
You ARE anti-immigrant because you rail against immigration and demand British jobs for British workers.
It couldn't be clearer.
So he's pro British workers.
Seems quite sensible if what you're interested in is national politics. Which seems like the right thing to be interested unless your up for election to the global parliament.
Seems quite sensible if what you're interested in is national politics. Which seems like the right thing to be interested unless your up for election to the global parliament.
Bollocks!
You ARE anti-immigrant because you rail against immigration and demand British jobs for British workers.
It couldn't be clearer.
That is just plain stupid MC5. Durruti is against how immigration is used...To say he is anti immigrant is just rubbish,infantile politics.......
Durruti like me hates racism and is a real internationalist.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Er, doritto describes himself as a 'class warrior', so that would suggest he supports workers of all nationalities, but he doesn't.
What exactly does it mean to "support workers of all nationalities" . ?
To me it sounds like empty posturing. Unless you can actually do something to benefit workers of all nationalities, it doesn't much matter if you support them or not.
From my point of view, I suppose it does benefit some workers from other countries if they can come here and work for more than they'd get in their home country. It does so at the price of causing lower wages in general for people who work in Britain.
In the long-term, I think it would be of more value to the people of the world if Britain elected a radical socialist government. If you've already given up on that project, why consider yourself interested in politics at all? If not, then there's a reasonable argument that if you want to represent your constituency, you ought to represent their interests. And if their interests include not having their wages lowered by competition with people from other countries, then it's not much use to tell them that they ought not to think like that..
To me it sounds like empty posturing. Unless you can actually do something to benefit workers of all nationalities, it doesn't much matter if you support them or not.
From my point of view, I suppose it does benefit some workers from other countries if they can come here and work for more than they'd get in their home country. It does so at the price of causing lower wages in general for people who work in Britain.
In the long-term, I think it would be of more value to the people of the world if Britain elected a radical socialist government. If you've already given up on that project, why consider yourself interested in politics at all? If not, then there's a reasonable argument that if you want to represent your constituency, you ought to represent their interests. And if their interests include not having their wages lowered by competition with people from other countries, then it's not much use to tell them that they ought not to think like that..
Of course, maybe they shouldn't think like that. I'm sure there are loads of people from the CBI who'd tell them the same, -
--You know, actually it is in your interests to work for less because otherwise you'll price yourself out of the global market. ...
--You know, actually it is in your interests to work for less because otherwise you'll price yourself out of the global market. ...
Spion
I hear ya
Not being in favour of state controls on them entering the country you live in for a start, while at the same time campaigning to unionise migrant and existing workers and for jobs, services and housing for ALL paid for by taxing the rich
What you seem to be missing is that it's not much use being "in favour" of taxing the rich, for example, unless you're in government.
Unless all you're interested in is having the moral highground, at the price of being able to do anything practical.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Workers are exploited under capitalism, who would have thought it - I hate how capitalists do that.
Anti-immigration rhetoric, wrapped up in psuedo, radical language ain't gonna change that. More likely to lead to an increase in exploitation for immigrant labour, as they are driven into the arms of people smugglers and other criminal gangs.
Spion
I hear ya
Attempting to popularise such ideas is being 'practical'.
Or do you think you can only do something practical if 'in government' and if so what do you say to get yourself there?
represent the interests of your constituency?
Which, unfortunately, according to most I've talked to, seem to include not having to compete for work with people from other countries who'll work for less.
Sounds better to me than telling them the same as the CBI and the labour and conservative government tell them, only for the most idealistic and moral reasons.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
The rhetoric and straw man building is pitiful.
Supporting workers of all natiomalities is the epitome of internationalism.
Supporting some workers of some nationalities is reactionary, divisive and some would say Strasserite.
The rhetoric and straw man building is pitiful.
Supporting workers of all natiomalities is the epitome of internationalism.
Supporting some workers of some nationalities is reactionary, divisive and some would say Strasserite.
Well you've certainly got the moral highground. I don't think it will actually do anyone any good though.
Still, maybe you could stand for the world parliament and really change things.
Spion
I hear ya
Since when was 'tax the rich to provide jobs and housing for ALL' something the CBI or Lab or Tories said? I must've missed that
What rhetoric and straw man building btw?
Do you think the point of politics is to get into power so as to change things, or to be right all the time?
Do you think that elected representatives should try to represent the interests of their constituency?
Do you think the point of politics is to get into power so as to change things, or to be right all the time?
Do you think that elected representatives should try to represent the interests of their constituency?
that'd be because they didn't say it, surprise...
No what the CBI say is that it's in the interests of british workers to have their wages lowered by having to compete with people from other countries, because otherwise they'd price themselves out of the global market.
You also seem to think it's in their interests to have to compete with people from other countries and have their wages lowered, as far as I can tell..
Same as the CBI, but for the best of reasons, like I said.
Really, this has to be one of the most meagre, facile posts yet.
You don't have to 'stand for the world parliament' to see that exploiting lower costs elsewhere whilst pulling up the drawbridge doesn't equate to a fair or ethical policy. Especially for a developed country with a history of trade, empire and commonwealth like the the UK. Trying to shovel the genie back in the bottle just seems nonsensical
But he does have the moral highground. Ethically, his stance is irreproachable.
The problem is that politically, it's plain stupid.
Spion
I hear ya
Where have i said that? I've said exactly the opposite - that workers should combine to force the rich to pay for the needs of all. But hey, don't let what i actually say spoil your little argument
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Tell you what, you stand for 'the world parliament' and let us know how you get on?
Because you won't get elected like that.
If you're interested in national politics, then what you need to be interested in is the interests of your potential constituency. In national politics, people from other countries who aren't yet here aren't your constituency, so it's futile to represent their interests, and rather unsuccessful as a way of persuading your potential constituency to vote for you to tell them, as you and others who disagree with durrutti, that if you're concerned about people from other countries driving your wages downwards, they're racist.
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Well, if I understood you correctly, you oppose Durrutti's view that immigration has bad effects for many people in this country, and primarily benefits the rich? You think immigration should be supported, and controlled less, not more?
Well, in that case, you think it's in the interests of people in this country to have to compete for work with people from other countries.
You may not have thought you said that, but you have.
And politicians should never aim at something more than narrow and national self interest then? What a failure of ambition; a call to limited horizons. And not at all delusional and hypocritical given Britain's vast role in shape/distorting world trade over the ages.
You can't wind back the clock, whatever primitivists like Durrutti say. And the mantra 'local jobs for local people' is as self-interested, restrictive and essentially xenophobic as it always has been, especially when our nationals have such freedom across the world.
You can't wind back the clock, whatever primitivists like Durrutti say. And the mantra 'local jobs for local people' is as self-interested, restrictive and essentially xenophobic as it always has been, especially when our nationals have such freedom across the world.
Similar threads
