Marx on immigration ..

[revol68]

of course forced migration hurts all peoples!! that is partly the point of this debate ( i am more interested in studying what the bosses do and why and how we can react)

of course we do NOT only consider whites .. we both live and work in majoirty non white areas and if you take a look at voice or new nation you will see ho wthose communities regard this new migration!! even diane abbot stated a few years ago how mad/wrong it is that her local hospital brings in people from teh other side of the world instead of employing local ( mainly afro carib british)

and yes in a way i am disregarding non locals .. we NEED to get our OWN act together before we can worry about others ..

Mate just because non whites can be as reactionary as whites doesn't prove shit.

Of course the last line is the truth of the matter, you are a parochial socialist who wants to look after "his own", which would explain why you think closed shops and sons and daughters housing policies are progressive. Fuck off back to Royston Vasey you petty minded fuck.

 

[tbaldwin]

Mate just because non whites can be as reactionary as whites doesn't prove shit.

Here we get to the point...Its not over RACE is it....Its about ideas....

Your ideas seem to be that anybody who says economic migration is bad is reactionary..WHATEVER RACE THEY ARE

Mine and Durrutis seem to be that anybody who defends free market migration policies has got things WRONG.

 

[118118]

Yes, but an appeal to 'ideas' may cloud the issue. It diesn't matter how aggresive ideas are (tbaldwin). Practicaliity, I suppose, I was is important.

And I don't agree wish your nationalism

 

[tbaldwin]

Yes, but an appeal to 'ideas' may cloud the issue. It diesn't matter how aggresive ideas are (tbaldwin). Practicaliity, I suppose, I was is important.

And I don't agree wish your nationalism

I'm not a Nationalist as you might have noticed most of my arguements are about the catastrphic consequences of economic migration.

 

[tbaldwin]

Yes, but an appeal to 'ideas' may cloud the issue. It diesn't matter how aggresive ideas are (tbaldwin). Practicaliity, I suppose, I was is important.

And I don't agree wish your nationalism

I think your right both sides of the arguement do need to come up with more practical ideas to defend their position.

I think reparations to poorer countries are neccesary and we need to compensate countries like South Africa for taking so many of their skilled workers.

 

[durruti02]

Mate just because non whites can be as reactionary as whites doesn't prove shit.

Of course the last line is the truth of the matter, you are a parochial socialist who wants to look after "his own", which would explain why you think closed shops and sons and daughters housing policies are progressive. Fuck off back to Royston Vasey you petty minded fuck.

your level of political understanding and of humanism and of humanity is ignorent and dismal .. you use 'look after their own' as an insult .. incredible

it is this basic failure of the left to 'look after their own' .. indeed its almost total alienation from 'it's own' that is the root cause of why the left and @ are so small

you have no understanding of the most basic processes that must be followed if we want the big prize .. of simple combination in the community and workforce ... we must start from the very very bottom .. we must NOT build our castle on sand like has always been done before .. it has been done by m/c revos many times before and it always fails .. and indeed it ususlly ushers in reaction .. and THIS is what i am afraid of

as i said before .. go and have kids and then tell me you don't understand what it means to look after your own .. it is not exclusive it is not reactionary it is not racist blah blah blah .. it is just simple humanity from which we can ripple out ..

 

[avu9lives]

Exploitation of immigration, abuse, much of the same taking place today' supresion and control, to benefit who?
So why if we know it's happening do we allow to continue?


[ suppose the description of the "Chinese rabble" might be seen as derogatory but is this an accurate quote from Marx]

 

[brasicritique]

- leaving aside the comments on Chinamen and the Irish (both 'spirit of the times' comments I'm sure)

and i suppose slavery was in the 'spirit of the times as well '

You are indeed a corpse searching for a soul

 

[nino_savatte]

where have all the marxists gone? .. long time passing
where have al the marxists gone? .. long time ago
where have al the marxists gone? .. became liberals every one
when will they ever learn
when will they ever learn



sorry but there are a load of people on U75 who profess to be in groups that call themselves marxist .. and no response ..
and immigration is one of the main issues ( rightly or wrongly) for w/c people in this country

so lets look at what marx said .. we don't have to slavishly follow but .. ..

So, which side of the right/left political dichotomy did you say you positioned yourself?

Are you a "Marxist", durutti or are you just a bullshitter? Odd how you begand this thread with the statement "Marx on immigration" and then proceed to paint Marx as a racist with this bizarre quote (I also note that none of the text that you used in the OP was cited).

Marx noted that the English bourgeoisie “exploited the Irish poverty to keep down the working class in England by forced immigration of poor Irishmen.”

Where is the racism in that quote? I get the feeling that you're not being entirely straight and have begun a lot of these threads to please your ego.

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm not a Nationalist as you might have noticed most of my arguements are about the catastrphic consequences of economic migration.

LOL!!!! How many more times will we see this?

 

[nino_savatte]

One more thing: who are these "British workers" who will "control immigration"?

 

[Knotted]

If you're genuinely interested in Marx and Irish immigration, this thread (which ran in parallel) had much more discussion on the topic (after post 182):

John Cruddas MP .. alleges government pushing immigration to undermine unions etc

 

[durruti02]

So, which side of the right/left political dichotomy did you say you positioned yourself?

Are you a "Marxist", durutti or are you just a bullshitter? Odd how you begand this thread with the statement "Marx on immigration" and then proceed to paint Marx as a racist with this bizarre quote (I also note that none of the text that you used in the OP was cited).

Where is the racism in that quote? I get the feeling that you're not being entirely straight and have begun a lot of these threads to please your ego.

i am a marxist nino .. i have NOT painted marx anything .. i have QOUTED him .. the qoutes are refernced somewhere in there i thought .. they were not hard to find ..

my point was key figures like Marx, Cesar Chavez and lately Chomsky have said similar stuff to myself .. and for the same progressive reasons .. and yet teh left alwasy misqoute them .. note how the left ALWAYS qoute how racism was used against irish workers but NEVER uses the whole qoutes about how the bosses USED immigration both for cheap labour, AND to create racism

p.s. i have not started these threads for my ego ( well not entirely! ).. but as i think the left needs a DRAMATIC and fundamental dose of change .. a large dose of marx .. a bit of bookchin, a bit of lenin quite a bit of o'shea and o'farrell and a lot of bone!

 

[nino_savatte]

i am a marxist nino .. i have NOT painted marx anything .. i have QOUTED him .. the qoutes are refernced somewhere in there i thought .. they were not hard to find ..

my point was key figures like Marx, Cesar Chavez and lately Chomsky have said similar stuff to myself .. and for the same progressive reasons .. and yet teh left alwasy misqoute them .. note how the left ALWAYS qoute how racism was used against irish workers but NEVER uses the whole qoutes about how the bosses USED immigration both for cheap labour, AND to create racism

p.s. i have not started these threads for my ego ( well not entirely! ).. but as i think the left needs a DRAMATIC and fundamental dose of change .. a large dose of marx .. a bit of bookchin, a bit of lenin quite a bit of o'shea and o'farrell and a lot of bone!

Marxist, my arse. You're no Marxist. You think that by selecting one or two quotes and constructing a weak argument around them, makes you a Marxist? You're only deceiving yourself.

Marx, Cesar Chavez and lately Chomsky have said similar stuff to myself .. and for the same progressive reasons ..

I should like to see these quotes...or are you going to tell us that you can't find them?

i have not started these threads for my ego

Bullshit, there are well over 16 threads that you have begun on the issue of immigration.

 

[nino_savatte]

Here's an example of selective quotation.

Marx noted that the English bourgeoisie “exploited the Irish poverty to keep down the working class in England by forced immigration of poor Irishmen.”

This should not, as other posters have pointed out, be seen as a Marxist justification for tighter immigration controls. One would have to be pretty thick, or beating a particular ideological drum, to delineate such a thing from this quote.

It is fairly common for the right to use quotes such as this to a) undermine the argument of their ideological opponents and to b) present this as a universality; something that the the so-called left have always been in favour of. Yet, I can find no calls for tighter immigration controls in any of the texts that I have read.

 

[durruti02]

Marxist, my arse. You're no Marxist. You think that by selecting one or two quotes and constructing a weak argument around them, makes you a Marxist? You're only deceiving yourself.

I should like to see these quotes...or are you going to tell us that you can't find them?

Bullshit, there are well over 16 threads that you have begun on the issue of immigration.

instead of going on about how many there are actually read what they say ..

so the one on Chavez .. do you know about him?? one of the key trade union organisers of the post war USA ..

and you haven't even bothered to read this thread!!

so the qoute

"Owing to the constantly increasing concentration of leaseholds, Ireland constantly sends her own surplus to the English labour market, and thus forces down wages and lowers the material and moral position of the English working class."

comes simply from

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/letters/70_04_09.htm

 

[durruti02]

Here's an example of selective quotation.


This should not, as other posters have pointed out, be seen as a Marxist justification for tighter immigration controls. One would have to be pretty thick, or beating a particular ideological drum, to delineate such a thing from this quote.

It is fairly common for the right to use quotes such as this to a) undermine the argument of their ideological opponents and to b) present this as a universality; something that the the so-called left have always been in favour of. Yet, I can find no calls for tighter immigration controls in any of the texts that I have read.

again if you note or had read the thread I gave full qoutes .. and actually noted that the left itself always miss out a bit .. you will also note that i was NOT making ANY definitive argument as to where marx stood on this issue ..

actually this was a half decent thread .. RMP3 is SW and we had a good debate .. and agreeing most of the time .. incidently he posted some stuff on another forum VERY similar to what i wrote!!

and er yet again .. i am NOT in favour of immigration controls .. BUT against cheap labour .. from wherever

please nino actually read this thread, maybe this one of all of them, .. then get back on it

 

[nino_savatte]

again if you note or had read the thread I gave full qoutes .. and actually noted that the left itself always miss out a bit .. you will also note that i was NOT making ANY definitive argument as to where marx stood on this issue ..

actually this was a half decent thread .. RMP3 is SW and we had a good debate .. and agreeing most of the time .. incidently he posted some stuff on another forum VERY similar to what i wrote!!

and er yet again .. i am NOT in favour of immigration controls .. BUT against cheap labour .. from wherever

please nino actually read this thread, maybe this one of all of them, .. then get back on it

Don't try wriggling, durutti, you selectively quoted a bit of text that you thought would support your thesis. It's a narrativisation and it's dishonest.

and er yet again .. i am NOT in favour of immigration controls .. BUT against cheap labour .. from wherever

You keep contradicting yourself. Here you say that you are not in favour of immigration controls but add the proviso of "cheap labour". You don't know whether you want a shit or a haircut.

 

[nino_savatte]

instead of going on about how many there are actually read what they say ..

so the one on Chavez .. do you know about him?? one of the key trade union organisers of the post war USA ..

and you haven't even bothered to read this thread!!

so the qoute

"Owing to the constantly increasing concentration of leaseholds, Ireland constantly sends her own surplus to the English labour market, and thus forces down wages and lowers the material and moral position of the English working class."

comes simply from

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1870/letters/70_04_09.htm

Patronising as well as a liar. That's nice. There is nothing in that text that truly supports your position. Indeed, you have selectivised and misread what Marx was saying. That's typically dishonest of you. The bit of text that you have quoted does not even support your position. It's obvious that you see only what you want to see.

I think Marx would be spinning in his grave if he knew that you had lifted a single paragraph out of a text of some 1,500 words and applied it to your views on immigration. Do you understand what the word "context" means?

 

[nino_savatte]

You didn't read the entire letter, did you?

This is pretty much the central thrust of the letter.

If, on the other hand, the English army and police were to be withdrawn from Ireland tomorrow, you would at once have an agrarian revolution in Ireland. But the downfall of the English aristocracy in Ireland implies and has as a necessary consequence its downfall in England. And this would provide the preliminary condition for the proletarian revolution in England. The destruction of the English landed aristocracy in Ireland is an infinitely easier operation than in England herself, because in Ireland the land question has been up to now the exclusive form of the social question because it is a question of existence, of life and death, for the immense majority of the Irish people, and because it is at the same time inseparable from the national question. Quite apart from the fact that the Irish character is more passionate and revolutionary than that of the English.

He's not talking about immigration, he's talking about revolution; a potential revolution in Ireland that could lead to a revolution in England.

How you managed to delineate a narrative on immigration from that article can only be surmised.

 

[nino_savatte]

Well, durutti?

 

[durruti02]

Patronising as well as a liar. That's nice. There is nothing in that text that truly supports your position. Indeed, you have selectivised and misread what Marx was saying. That's typically dishonest of you. The bit of text that you have quoted does not even support your position. It's obvious that you see only what you want to see.

I think Marx would be spinning in his grave if he knew that you had lifted a single paragraph out of a text of some 1,500 words and applied it to your views on immigration. Do you understand what the word "context" means?

you kill me you absolutely kill me .. all the qoutes are available in the OP .. and rebel gave the link ..

if you had bothered to read the OP you will see that i was NOT making ANY argument about when ther marx was right or wrong .. i was not alledging that marx overall supportted my position .. the fact remains that that ONE qoute does ... which is undeniably interesting in this debate ... he also comes out as racist .. ( does that make all marxists racists??)

and i actually gave the qoute IN context unlike the left who miss out the full qoute .. look again

if yu were really interested in these threads what you would do here is try to show a differrent face of marx .. you do not attempt to debate

 

[nino_savatte]

you kill me you absolutely kill me .. all the qoutes are available in the OP .. and rebel gave the link ..

if you had bothered to read the OP you will see that i was NOT making ANY argument about when ther marx was right or wrong .. i was not alledging that marx overall supportted my position .. the fact remains that that ONE qoute does ... which is undeniably interesting in this debate ... he also comes out as racist .. ( does that make all marxists racists??)

and i actually gave the qoute IN context unlike the left who miss out the full qoute .. look again

if yu were really interested in these threads what you would do here is try to show a differrent face of marx .. you do not attempt to debate

So why did you quote it if, as you say, "i was NOT making ANY argument about when ther marx was right or wrong .. i was not alledging that marx overall supportted my position ". One uses a quote from a piece of text to support their argument. are you saying that you had no argument to being with?

You're a thick fucking twat. No wonder baldwin and beckyp think you're the bollocks. With their ignorance and lack of erudition, you must appear to be something of a genius to them.

 

[durruti02]

So why did you quote it if, as you say, "i was NOT making ANY argument about when ther marx was right or wrong .. i was not alledging that marx overall supportted my position ". One uses a quote from a piece of text to support their argument. are you saying that you had no argument to being with?

You're a thick fucking twat. No wonder baldwin and beckyp think you're the bollocks. With their ignorance and lack of erudition, you must appear to be something of a genius to them.

oh boy you are a MUPPET .. these are debating forums .. i oped a thread on debating what marx thinks .. it was good debate .. i thought RMP3s ( sw) made some very good contributions .. bye bye

 

[nino_savatte]

oh boy you are a MUPPET .. these are debating forums .. i oped a thread on debating what marx thinks .. it was good debate .. i thought RMP3s ( sw) made some very good contributions .. bye bye

Is this the best you can do? You call me a "muppet" because I punched a massive hole in your argument? How auld did you say you were?

You lied and you misrepresented Marx on this thread. You used a selectivised quotation to shore up your 'argument'. It didn't work, have the good grace to admit that you were wrong.

 

[durruti02]

Is this the best you can do? You call me a "muppet" because I punched a massive hole in your argument? How auld did you say you were?

You lied and you misrepresented Marx on this thread. You used a selectivised quotation to shore up your 'argument'. It didn't work, have the good grace to admit that you were wrong.

 

[nino_savatte]

That's right, respond with smilies. You haven't got anything else. You misrepresented Marx on this thread and I wasn't the only one to spot it. I'm sorry if you don't like that but this is the grown up world. If you lie, expect to be found out.

 

[durruti02]

That's right, respond with smilies. You haven't got anything else. You misrepresented Marx on this thread and I wasn't the only one to spot it. I'm sorry if you don't like that but this is the grown up world. If you lie, expect to be found out.

explain how the op misrepresents marx when it is clearly a debating OP asking what does marx think!??

i'll reproduce it for you here .. if you have other qoutes please post them .. jon the debate!


"is it possible to state what karl mark's view was on immigration .. if it it is what was it .. to start off see below ..


The NO Borders Marx

'But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favour of free trade. Karl Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1848)'


and the Anti Immigration Marx

who was against the 'chinese rabble' being imported to undercut wages and the irish immigration to Englandallegedly because they want “the right to work on the mainland.”

Writing in March/april to Meyer and Vogt 1870, Marx noted that the English bourgeoisie “exploited the Irish poverty to keep down the working class in England by forced immigration of poor Irishmen.”


"..Ireland constantly sends her own surplus to the English labour market, and thus forces down wages and lowers the material and moral position of the English working class..."

interestingly the left often reproduces parts of this letter ( below) but not the above sentance ..

"..And most important of all! Every industrial and commercial centre in England now possesses a working class divided into two hostile camps, English proletarians and Irish proletarians. The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish worker he regards himself as a member of the ruling nation and consequently he becomes a tool of the English aristocrats and capitalists against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself. He cherishes religious, social, and national prejudices against the Irish worker. His attitude towards him is much the same as that of the “poor whites” to the Negroes in the former slave states of the U.S.A.. The Irishman pays him back with interest in his own money. He sees in the English worker both the accomplice and the stupid tool of the English rulers in Ireland..."


of course as always is .. what do we do about it all!"

 

[nino_savatte]

That's right, durutti, post up some smilies. You've got nothing else.

 

[nino_savatte]

explain how the op misrepresents marx when it is clearly a debating OP asking what does marx think!??

i'll reproduce it for you here .. if you have other qoutes please post them .. jon the debate!


"is it possible to state what karl mark's view was on immigration .. if it it is what was it .. to start off see below ..


The NO Borders Marx

'But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favour of free trade. Karl Marx, On the Question of Free Trade (1848)'


and the Anti Immigration Marx

who was against the 'chinese rabble' being imported to undercut wages and the irish immigration to Englandallegedly because they want “the right to work on the mainland.”

Writing in March/april to Meyer and Vogt 1870, Marx noted that the English bourgeoisie “exploited the Irish poverty to keep down the working class in England by forced immigration of poor Irishmen.”


"..Ireland constantly sends her own surplus to the English labour market, and thus forces down wages and lowers the material and moral position of the English working class..."

interestingly the left often reproduces parts of this letter ( below) but not the above sentance ..

"..And most important of all! Every industrial and commercial centre in England now possesses a working class divided into two hostile camps, English proletarians and Irish proletarians. The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standard of life. In relation to the Irish worker he regards himself as a member of the ruling nation and consequently he becomes a tool of the English aristocrats and capitalists against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself. He cherishes religious, social, and national prejudices against the Irish worker. His attitude towards him is much the same as that of the “poor whites” to the Negroes in the former slave states of the U.S.A.. The Irishman pays him back with interest in his own money. He sees in the English worker both the accomplice and the stupid tool of the English rulers in Ireland..."


of course as always is .. what do we do about it all!"

Again, you have not only misread and misunderstood the letter, you have misrepresented its contents.

This remark is rather revealing

interestingly the left often reproduces parts of this letter ( below) but not the above sentance ..

When you say "the left", you mean those people who actaully oppose your crazy right wing ideas on immigration.