Refusal of work and the immigration debate
- Thread starter durruti02
- Start date
Pigeon said:
yes mate and i am against immigration control and in favour of legalisation. i am ALSO against immigration , as it is used to provide cheap labour and attack the unions ..
the left end up being against immigration control .. fine but TOTALLY missing the point as to the function of immigration in todays economy .. and end up therefore being seen as pro immigrant and ANTI indiginous worker and fueling the rise of the right
do you not see that the attacks on w/c people who are not taking up the shit jobs on offer are part of the whole equation?
What is the point of being against something, but not trying to stop it (or admitting that such a thing is impossible). Is it not an empty politics of gesture? I mean, I am opposed on principle to disease and bad haircuts.
Surely the question should be what you actually think should happen?
Surely the question should be what you actually think should happen?
No one is saying that an influx of immigrant labour does not put downard pressure on wages. However you have to acknowledge as well that having anyone willing to work for less than the average wage drives down wages, its not just immigrants! That is why the reserve army of labour (the unemployed) exists under capitalism, in order to provide a constant pressure downwards on wages by the threat that there is always someone willing to do the job for less.
If all the immigrants left Britain tomorrow would there be a halt to the downward pressure on wages? No, the "blame" for this would simply shift to those workers/unemployed who are the poorest and willing to work for less than the average. What would you propose to do then?
The fact that under neo-liberalism it is immigrants who provide some of this reserve army of labour does not make the solution any different than it was in the days before the welfare state, when the reserve army of labour was simply the masses of unemployed workers of the country. Unionise them (in the case of illegal immigrants legalise them), give them the same rights as other workers and fight alongside them for the same wages, that way there is no one who can work for a lower wage and no pressue from fellow workers to drive wages down. That this struggle involves a fight against racism and the xenophobic prejudices some indigenous workers have does make it harder but it makes it even more worth it when you win!
Your whole hullabaloo about immigration and immigrants just demonstrates your failure to grasp this problem properly and come up with a solution which is both working-class and internationalist, as any struggle around immigrants must necessarily be.
If all the immigrants left Britain tomorrow would there be a halt to the downward pressure on wages? No, the "blame" for this would simply shift to those workers/unemployed who are the poorest and willing to work for less than the average. What would you propose to do then?
The fact that under neo-liberalism it is immigrants who provide some of this reserve army of labour does not make the solution any different than it was in the days before the welfare state, when the reserve army of labour was simply the masses of unemployed workers of the country. Unionise them (in the case of illegal immigrants legalise them), give them the same rights as other workers and fight alongside them for the same wages, that way there is no one who can work for a lower wage and no pressue from fellow workers to drive wages down. That this struggle involves a fight against racism and the xenophobic prejudices some indigenous workers have does make it harder but it makes it even more worth it when you win!
Your whole hullabaloo about immigration and immigrants just demonstrates your failure to grasp this problem properly and come up with a solution which is both working-class and internationalist, as any struggle around immigrants must necessarily be.
Sucram said:
sucrum i agree with most of your post BUT
you have ignored the OP .. if it is the case that the unemployed are no longer interested in this low wage work then the your arguement fails to an extent .. in fact it is precisely the point of the OP that the arguement put by you no longer works HENCE the need for immigration
second that no one is making out immigrants are bad but that immigration is currently being used as a tool by the bosses . what is being called for by me is some honesty from the left .. just as the left will accept that at times the unemployed end up being used by capitalism so i am saying immigration is being used by the bosses
that is not to be against immigrants in any way or form .. to be against sweat shops is not to be against thos e who work in them
the left is fueling the the shift to the right without this honesty
Workers are not unwilling to work. Rather, they are smart enough to realise when they are being fucked over for less than nothing nothing and are unwilling to work for a poverty wage. As has been said, immigrants will work for less than indigenous workers because either a) their situation is far worse than working-class people in Britain for a variety of reasons and they will do anything to ameliorate the bad conditions even slightly or b) they have the option of saving their money and moving back to their home country where it is worth far more.
I've worked with immigrants from Eastern Europe, one was a Pole, his fiancee and him, both teachers, had come to Britain to work because they were earning more money in Britain. He worked as a labourer, she worked as a food stand attendent. They earnt more doing those jobs than they did as teachers in Poland. They've since returned to Poland having saved enough money to allow them to start a family and live decently. British workers do not have that option, they are stuck in Britain on poverty wages in poverty conditions for the rest of their lives.
Yes, having some meagre benefits means that some people will rather not work shit wages and live on benefits instead, but this is a tiny minority out of the working-class in this country. Most people who don't work have valid reasons or circumstances which prevent them working. Either mentally/physically disabled people who simply are incapable of the work offered to them, young people failed by the education system who cannot find decent work with the poor marks they have achieved, or single mothers who can't afford decent child-care on the meagre salary that is offered them. Without free child-care single mothers cannot work on the minimum wage cause the cost of private child care leaves them worse off than if they stayed on benefits! Thats far more a cause of people not working than this supposed non-existant "can work/won't work" attitude.
I don't blame workers for not wanting to take poverty wages. I do however think that everyone should work, but that this work should be productive, socially necessary and on a living wage, not the poverty/minimum wage. I'm not in favour of refusal to work, I'm in favour of workers and the unemployed fighting for well paid, productive and socially necessary work for everyone. The working-class taking control of society, getting rid of parasitic and unnecessary jobs and dividing the rest of the working-week up amongst society as a whole would cut hours and give people the productive work they need as human beings while giving them the free time they needed to forge proper social relations, grow and develop and not be alienated. Obviously society would need to be under the control of the workers to do all this, but thats why I believe in the necessity of revolution.
Those things would solve poverty and the supposed "problem" of people with a "won't work" attitude.
I've worked with immigrants from Eastern Europe, one was a Pole, his fiancee and him, both teachers, had come to Britain to work because they were earning more money in Britain. He worked as a labourer, she worked as a food stand attendent. They earnt more doing those jobs than they did as teachers in Poland. They've since returned to Poland having saved enough money to allow them to start a family and live decently. British workers do not have that option, they are stuck in Britain on poverty wages in poverty conditions for the rest of their lives.
Yes, having some meagre benefits means that some people will rather not work shit wages and live on benefits instead, but this is a tiny minority out of the working-class in this country. Most people who don't work have valid reasons or circumstances which prevent them working. Either mentally/physically disabled people who simply are incapable of the work offered to them, young people failed by the education system who cannot find decent work with the poor marks they have achieved, or single mothers who can't afford decent child-care on the meagre salary that is offered them. Without free child-care single mothers cannot work on the minimum wage cause the cost of private child care leaves them worse off than if they stayed on benefits! Thats far more a cause of people not working than this supposed non-existant "can work/won't work" attitude.
I don't blame workers for not wanting to take poverty wages. I do however think that everyone should work, but that this work should be productive, socially necessary and on a living wage, not the poverty/minimum wage. I'm not in favour of refusal to work, I'm in favour of workers and the unemployed fighting for well paid, productive and socially necessary work for everyone. The working-class taking control of society, getting rid of parasitic and unnecessary jobs and dividing the rest of the working-week up amongst society as a whole would cut hours and give people the productive work they need as human beings while giving them the free time they needed to forge proper social relations, grow and develop and not be alienated. Obviously society would need to be under the control of the workers to do all this, but thats why I believe in the necessity of revolution.
Those things would solve poverty and the supposed "problem" of people with a "won't work" attitude.
bluestreak
HomosexualityIsStalin’sAtomBombtoDestroyAmerica
i dont even know why people bother to reply to these fucking threads. it's quite possible to oppose capitalism without supporting the undermiing of the british working classes' economic interests OR closed borders. and no matter how many times it is said the same people make the same fucking points about the british left, the liberals, racism and whatnot. for new years i'm not going to bother reading any more of them i think.
Gmart
Well-Known Member
Sucram said:
Therefore communism/Socialism. Don't leave it to the market, define everything and then allocate work to everyone.
Authoritarian, but it's for the good of all.
What about those who disagree and consider that it is a basic right to set up a business and make a profit?
I appreciate the idealism, but surely you are not putting forward MORE authoritarianism, MORE nanny statism.
Which are you for? A big government or a small one?
As far as the workers issue goes, the problem is that unskilled workers are abused. Solution that they should be trained. Thus training should be a priority for all Adults and for free.
The Poverty trap described by Sucram does indeed exist and should be a priority to counter. More localism would also help the areas which are not London.
Sucram said:
interesting posts sucram but you miss the fundamental reality of which way the wind is blowing in society .. what we both define as progressive politics have been popularly linked with a pro immigrtaion open borders position .. this is a KEY factor in the ability of the far right to be organising and gaining support in areas where WE the left or beyond left should be winning
as i have said many times look at the positions of the SWP and the rest of the anti facist left indeed what many of the left have said on these threads how immigration is GOOD for the w/c
The Black Hand
Unclean
Quote:
think we should throw out all the bone idle, foul mouthed,and benefit claiming young british males who are presently polluting our towns and cities in large numbers. They will spend most of their lives drifting in and out of criminality, with no attempt to make any form of contribution to society, apart from taking large amounts of taxpayers money.
At least this guy wants to work.
Just to say - this quote at the top has nothing to do with the left.
think we should throw out all the bone idle, foul mouthed,and benefit claiming young british males who are presently polluting our towns and cities in large numbers. They will spend most of their lives drifting in and out of criminality, with no attempt to make any form of contribution to society, apart from taking large amounts of taxpayers money.
At least this guy wants to work.
treelover said:
Just to say - this quote at the top has nothing to do with the left.
The Black Hand
Unclean
Sucram said:
I like this...
The Black Hand
Unclean
Sucram said:
This sounds like a return to the failed policies of Keynesianism - capitalists simply won't let it happen again. A modified version may appear down the line but the entire problem with the 'productivist' point of view is that in Britain it is now knowledge/IT which is the dominant feature of capitalism, not material goods (production).
Whereas the miners were seen by many as the class vanguard in Britain, according to Negri it is people like computer programmers today. In short, anarchism/ socialism (call it what you will) is the direct option today with no mediation because technologically it is now possible, the old demarcations between politics and economics have totally collapsed too.
The Black Hand
Unclean
tbaldwin said:
I do not think it is possible to be for or against supporting economic migration (you are forever chasing a moving subjects), cos few governments (of the world) would say you've got to go or stay for economic reasons. Further it is impossible, or at least very very difficult (I'll not discount it totally), to control migration in any way that is not racist. Especially when we are in a country that built economic and political structures of empire which still control and command, either directly or indirectly, social conditions around the world.
Therefore the realistic position is dealing with 'shit happens'.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
durruti02 said:
There is nothing in your OP. You have described yourself to me as an "anarchist-communist", yet in your OP you waste no time laying into anarchists.
This will be another one-sided 'debate' where you will abuse anyone who dares to disagree with you. If you can't abuse them, then you will start lying and cheating.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
ViolentPanda said:Yeah, but you didn't say what durruti02 wanted you to say, damn you!
Exactly, one has to conform to the contours of durutti's vague argument. If they don't, woe betide them.
Attica said:
i was hopeing as an anarchist intelectual
, you would comment on the refusal of work idea .. (or is that more of an italian/autop/womble thing than yours) anyway my point which i don't think anyone ( apart from sucram) has got yet is the arguement that there is no longer a 'reserve army of labour' in this country and that by neccessity then the bosses with the suport of the state must import it.
evidence? that kids are just not interested in taking jobs at the wages conditions being offerred is hown by very high levels of youth unemploymnet yet equal high levels of job vacancies
if what i suggest is true this is very important to how marxist/leftwingers must view immigration and disproves the positionof the SW in this SR article which you would think would also be their absolute position http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9895
The Black Hand
Unclean
durruti02 said:i was hopeing as an anarchist intelectual
anyway my point which i don't think anyone ( apart from sucram) has got yet is the arguement that there is no longer a 'reserve army of labour' in this country and that by neccessity then the bosses with the suport of the state must import it.
evidence? that kids are just not interested in taking jobs at the wages conditions being offerred is hown by very high levels of youth unemploymnet yet equal high levels of job vacancies
if what i suggest is true this is very important to how marxist/leftwingers must view immigration and disproves the positionof the SW in this SR article which you would think would also be their absolute position http://www.socialistreview.org.uk/article.php?articlenumber=9895
It is not my specialism, though I think Negri said something about this in "The Politics of Subversion" (though I could be wrong). I remember his argument was something like this, "if we refuse to work capitals fucked", a paraphrase
. This leads onto other buzzwords like 'Exodus' - working class flight from and against work. This all sounds 'very hippy' to British readers i think, but it isn't a matter of just that alone. At the same time they have practiced 'price setting' recently in Italy (see Negri film "Revolt that never ends", which is worth seeing for many other reasons too) so there's an attempt to build the multitude, with diverse income sources - including informal ones, with welfare cheap/free 'shopping' that they have enforced, in the different manifestations.
Similar threads
