The children of Windrush
- Thread starter Tropi
- Start date
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
'we'? Don't include me in this.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
what, you mean if people live off grid?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Sorry, who is "we"?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
We're all in it together, standing in solidarity with our employers and our landlords to see off the foreign menace...
dlr has it right - this is a fascist vision of the corporate state.
dlr has it right - this is a fascist vision of the corporate state.
not-bono-ever
meh
Doctors, Nurses and teachers obvs
Ensure there is no hiding place for these undesirables. Every patriotic citizen has his duty to expose them whenever they find them.
/joking but not really a joking matter
Mrs NBE was tasked with organising a trip to the battlefields for history a couple of years ago & has sourced some external charitable funding to pretty much cover it . Most of the kids did not have paperwork to enable them to leave the country ( extreme example but it is a pretty unique school in that regard)
Last edited:
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Yes, I think I effectively consider immigration controls a necessary evil, but I should say that I'm entirely willing to change my mind. I can't say I have a clear view on immigration; it has changed somewhat post Brexit referendum because the message coming out of that seemed to be that people like me - who generally regard immigration if anything as positive at least in terms of direct consequences for me - have been guilty of underestimating or ignoring the consequences it has for people who don't live in cosmopolitan London and who have less secure means of income.
I'm open to being convinced that I should discard those concerns, and I'm also open to being convinced that an essentially open border is a feasible option in the near future and without wholesale political revolution.
I don't think the pre-1962 argument is convincing. I don't think the situation then is meaningfully comparable. Firstly we didn't have open immigration to the whole world. Secondly previously to that point the amount of immigration had been relatively low and the reason the additional controls were introduced was that the numbers were going up. Yes we survived ok in the period of time when levels of immigration were low enough not to provoke calls for increased controls. Is it realistic to suggest that, were we to open borders to anyone in the world right now, the numbers we'd see would be in the same order as they were in the 1950s?
For those who advocate a fully open border - is the argument that the numbers simply woudln't be as high as people imagine they would be, and therefore below a level which they'd accept would become problematic? Or is the argument that it's a fallacy to consider any level of immigration to be problematic?
I'm genuinely open to being convinced. I'd like to be convinced because of the clearer conscience such a position would bring with it. That's only the case if I genuinely believe it's a realistic option though.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Perhaps you could begin by asking yourself how you are defining "realistic" and what led you to believe that certain things aren't realistic.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Point of order on this one - there was net emigration from the UK throughout the 50s, 60s and 70s. So no, that is not the reason the additional controls were introduced.
And how would you do that? Visit every rented property just to check the landlord hasn't let it to illegals?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
You might begin your quest here:
“The problem is not that white workers are desperate to protect their ethnic identity. It is, rather, that in the absence of political mechanisms and social movements that can challenge their wider marginalisation, such identity is all that many have to lean upon.
However low one caps immigration, it will not affect austerity policy, or the atomisation of society, or the crisis in the NHS, or the neutering of trade unions. The immigration debate cannot be won simply by debating immigration, whether from an economic or a cultural viewpoint. Anxieties about immigration are an expression of a wider sense of political voicelessness, abandonment and disengagement. Until those problems are tackled, the anxieties will remain.”
That working-class lives are more fraught is not down to immigration | Kenan Malik
“Too many who rightly bemoan the corrosion of working-class organisations see the problem as too much immigration. Too many who have a liberal view on immigration are willing to accept attacks on working-class living standards. Until both those blinkered approaches are confronted, there will be no real challenge to the populists, nor to the erosion of the influence of the left.”
THE WORKING CLASS, IMMIGRATION & THE LEFT
“The forms of social organization that once gave working class lives identity, solidarity, indeed dignity, have disappeared. Much the same developments can be seen in many other European nations. ‘One of the biggest failures’ of contemporary mainstream political parties, the American philosopher Michael Sandel has observed, ‘has been the failure to take seriously and to speak directly to people’s aspiration to feel that they have some meaningful say in shaping the forces that govern their lives’.
The result has been the creation of what many commentators in Britain call the ‘left behind’ working class. In France, there has been much talk of ‘peripheral France’, a phrase coined by the social geographer Christophe Guilluy to describe people ‘pushed out by the deindustrialization and gentrification of the urban centers’, who ‘live away from the economic and decision-making centers in a state of social and cultural non-integration’ and have come to ‘feel excluded’. Both these terms are, in my view, problematic, but both also give a sense of the social, political and existential changes that have been wrought.
Immigration has played almost no part in fostering the changes that have left so many feeling disaffected. Immigrants are not responsible for the weakening of the labour movement, or the transformation of social democratic parties, or the imposition of austerity policies. Immigration has, however, come to be a means through which many perceive these changes.
The so-called ‘left behind’ have been left behind largely because of economic and political changes. But they have come to see their marginalization primarily as a cultural loss. In part, the same social and economic changes that have led to the marginalization of the ‘left behind’ have also made it far more difficult to view that marginalization in political terms. The very decline of the economic and political power of the working class and the weakening of labour organizations and social democratic parties, have helped obscure the economic and political roots of social problems. And as culture has become the medium through which social issues are refracted, so the ‘left behind’ have also come to see their problems in cultural terms. They, too, have turned to the language of identity to express their discontent.
Through this process, the meaning of solidarity has transformed. Politically, the sense of belonging to a group or collective has historically been expressed in two broad forms: through the politics of identity and through the politics of solidarity. The former stresses attachment to common identities based on such categories as race, nation, gender or culture. The latter draws people into a collective not because of a given identity but to further a political or social goal. Where the politics of identity divides, the politics of solidarity finds collective purpose across the fissures of race or gender, sexuality or religion, culture or nation. But it is the politics of solidarity that has crumbled over the past two decades as social movements have eroded. For many today, the only form of collective politics that seem possible is that rooted in identity.”
POPULISM AND IMMIGRATION
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
'illegals'
The language surrounding this stuff is poisonous.
The language surrounding this stuff is poisonous.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Thing is, you're asking the wrong people these questions. I don't agree with the UK's immigration policy. I have no interest in helping the state administer a policy I consider to be evil. I have every interest in seeing their efforts to enforce it fail. There is no 'we' here - it is 'they'. My 'we' is much more likely to include the 'illegals'.
You may have a point there. Illegal immigrant has been shortened to 'illegals', not by me I might add.
Person Without The Right of Abode is very long, Shorten it to PWTRA?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
The French 'sans papiers' would be better.
I have to obey laws I don't agree with as well! So does everyone.
Treacle Toes
Time
What do you mean not by you?
You have just done that. You don't get a pass because someone else has done so before...you are perpetuating dehumanising language and attitudes.
Stop pretending to be innocent..you are fooling no-one.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
'don't you see? It was ze law'
I'm anything but innocent, and I'm not trying to fool anyone. Lots of people have used that word to refer to people without the right to be in the UK, and I agree it's probably time to find a better word.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
If we reach a stage where it becomes a serious legal matter to be found to be 'harbouring an illegal', I will make a point of seeking to do just that. Some laws need to be broken.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
*resists Godwin*
Treacle Toes
Time
Lot's of people where?
Do you do everything that others do?
What kind of weak excuse is that?
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
You should take responsibility for the language you use. That others use hateful terms is no excuse for you doing the same. And 'lots of people' also firmly reject such things, as I would have thought you would have realised from posting here.
Sorry miss, won't do it again.
Seriously, I'd have no problems with a new word being found, although in itself it won't actually change anyone's status.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
You don't have to. You choose to.
You of course never smoke a joint or download music or films you haven't paid for.
trabuquera
Modesty Bag
No. Immigration officials who have reasonable grounds to believe someone doesn't have the right to be here can ask for their papers. If they don't have them, a legal process ensues. Why do you feel the need to have every property in the land inspected because of the *possible* presence of people without legal rights to live in the UK? Why extend bureaucracy that far?
Where (abusive) landlords have been exploiting immigrants, legal or illegal, by cramming them into substandard accommodation (which is a genuine problem and risk to health) - or by not paying taxes on their rental income - then yeah they should be fined to the moon and back. But simply renting a room / flat / mansion to someone who doesn't have the right immigration papers? I struggle to see that as a crime tbh.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
ffs. You appear to be blaming others for your use of the term 'illegals'. Sort yourself out.
Similar threads
