The children of Windrush

[agricola]

I see May has been banging on about how vital the Windrush generation were in rebuilding the country, how they are intrinsically British etc etc. It is a terrible shame that such a display of shamelessness has so many rivals nowadays.

 

[editor]

Brixton rally:

In photos: Brixton comes out to support the Windrush Generation, Fri 20th April 2018

 

[Gramsci]

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

Im not letting this pass. I live in same area.

Cosmopolitan Brixton is full of people who have less secure incomes.

As you should know Coldharbour Ward (which covers Brixton) is classified as deprived. Despite the gentrification of central Brixton.

The consquences that the less well off complain about arent immigrants but the social and ethnic cleansing of Brixton and London. Something you regularly take issue with on Brixton forum.

Its what we argue about on Brixton forum.

 

[oryx]

I wonder if the lack of unionisation is simply down to money, in that people in very low paid/insecure jobs cannot even afford to stump up a couple of quid a week in fees.

 

[mauvais]

Brixton rally:

In photos: Brixton comes out to support the Windrush Generation, Fri 20th April 2018

Good photos but those are some utterly shit posters. Entirely expected of the SWP of course, but seriously...

 

[SpookyFrank]

I wonder if the lack of unionisation is simply down to money, in that people in very low paid/insecure jobs cannot even afford to stump up a couple of quid a week in fees.

IME people in these sorts of jobs don't have any faith in a union being willing or able to help them with anything.

 

[Gramsci]

Good photos but those are some utterly shit posters. Entirely expected of the SWP of course, but seriously...

Thing is in Brixton the local Labour party won't touch controversial issues like this. So it is left to the Trots.

This was widely advertised on FB. And from what I saw a good cross section of Brixton turned out.

The only local Cllr present was Rachel ( see the photos,). She was expelled from the Labour group for not being Blairite enough, supporting Corbyn for leader ( they all supported Liz Kendell) and generally sticking up for her constituents. She is popular with locals. Unlike the Nu Labour lot.

Ive met a few SWP in Brixton and they are ok.

There is massive gulf between Lambeth labour ( run by Nu Labour in a particularly bullying nasty way) and local people. Leaving a hole filled by other groups like SWP.

In Brixton I'm not going to criticize them to much. Given the way the Lambeth labour party is.

 

[mauvais]

Thing is in Brixton the local Labour party won't touch controversial issues like this. So it is left to the Trots.

This was widely advertised on FB. And from what I saw a good cross section of Brixton turned out.

The only local Cllr was Rachel ( see the photos,). She was expelled from the Labour group for not being Blairite enough, supporting Corbyn for leader ( they all supported Liz Kendell) and generally sticking up for her constituents.

Ive met a few SWP in Brixton and they are ok.

There is massive gulf between Lambeth labour run by Nu Labour in a particularly bullying nasty way and local people. Leaving a hole filled by other groups like SWP.

In Brixton I'm not going to criticize them to much. Given the way the Lambeth labour party is.

It fucks up everything it should be attempting to do - implies that the Windrush generation's continued presence in this country is open to discussion rather than an inalienable right, conflates them with migrants and refugees, then uses their plight as a vehicle for open borders.

I realise I've gone full Treelover - you should never go full Treelover - but it's bollocks, and would be far better publicity without their shit props.

Not that anyone needs to work at making Diane Abbott look bad either, but being pictured next to these things is free ammunition for her right wing opponents.

 

[Gramsci]

I read some posts here and wonder if I must be living in a different country. I'm a "local" and my partner is one of those European "migrants". I have Polish friends. As well as working with people from many different country and backgrounds. That's just normal life for me.

I really don't understand all this stuff about locals and immigrants.

 

[Gramsci]

It fucks up everything it should be attempting to do - implies that the Windrush generation's continued presence in this country is open to discussion rather than an inalienable right, conflates them with migrants and refugees, then uses their plight as a vehicle for open borders.

I realise I've gone full Treelover - you should never go full Treelover - but it's bollocks, and would be far better publicity without their shit props.

Not that anyone needs to work at making Diane Abbott look bad either, but being pictured next to these things is free ammunition for her right wing opponents.

But that is how local Brixton people see it from my view.

I posted earlier an anecdote. An Afro Carribbean friend of mine said that the way recent migrants are talked about ( the Poles he was referring to) was the same as the way that his Father's generation who came from Carribbean were blamed for taking jobs etc etc.

Black people I know in Brixton definitely "conflate" the issue.

Having experience of racism and anti immigration sentiment themselves they understand these issues. They aren't led by Trot groups.

 

[Gramsci]

What about a Windrush immigrant who was involved in Brixton rioting, has spent time in prison, but also cared for his mum? Good immigrant or bad immigrant?

t.

FYI as I live in Brixton I know that the local Black British community refer to the 1981 Brixton riot as the Uprising. To distinguish it from criminal activity.

 

[friendofdorothy]

Good immigrant or bad immigrant?

You can't simply break it down like that.

quite. We can't break it down like that.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Im not letting this pass. I live in same area.

Cosmopolitan Brixton is full of people who have less secure incomes.

As you should know Coldharbour Ward (which covers Brixton) is classified as deprived. Despite the gentrification of central Brixton.

The consquences that the less well off complain about arent immigrants but the social and ethnic cleansing of Brixton and London. Something you regularly take issue with on Brixton forum.

Its what we argue about on Brixton forum.

Another point about 'immigration'. When it happens within countries, displacing local populations, somehow it's not even a thing that govt should be involved with. It's 'good' somehow, or at the very least 'organic'. Migration across borders as opposed to migration within borders is an essentially arbitrary distinction, one that relies on an appeal to some form of nationalism to have a meaningful difference.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

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.

You are a Scot who lives in London, no? I'm Welsh and I live in London. We are immigrants (same for English people who have moved). It is not 'they'. It is 'we'.

 

[Gramsci]

I'll try and come back to some of the other points later.

But "solidarity" as a response, as I see it, just isn't going to change the fact that are gunboats in the med. I do agree that as a response it can help with things like how existing immigrants are recieved, and accepted, and so on. If the theory is that it's part of a build up to some kind of revolution, which then changes the gunboats-in-the-med situation through non-parliamentary mechanisms - I simply don't see that as plausible. It's not going to happen. Of course, maybe I will be proven wrong. But because I don't believe that's going to ever happen, I resort to the unsatisfactory beaurocratic methods as a plausible means to make things less bad.

There is nothing stopping this government or a future one to start repealing legislation around immigration.

A lot of immigration laws and bureaucracy are recent.

To start with get rid of the "hostile environment". End obligation of landlords , employers and NHS to check people's immigration status.

Bring back free movement for all those who live in the Commonwealth. As they used to have. What the Windrush issue does bring up is this countries legacy of colonialism. I know an older migrant from Pakistan. Resents the way laws were changed to make it more difficult to come here for others after him from ex colonies.

Retain free movement for EU citizens.

Reinstate the funding for ships to save those in the Med. Which was cut by government ( May was Home Secretary at the time). Cut as saving people from drowning was seen to encourage migrants. Better that they drown to put off others in future was government view.

Close down detention centres. UK locks up more people than other countries for long periods of time. Most of whom are asylum seekers.

End deporting of adults who came here as children.Under international obligation UK has to accept children for asylum. Once they reach adulthood they are deported. Even though they have grown up here.


This would be a start. Its entirely feasible to do within existing bureaucracy of government.

Are you in agreement with that list? As a start.

 

[billbond]

Retain free movement for EU citizens.

so ignore the Brexit vote, ok

 

[redsquirrel]

I wonder if the lack of unionisation is simply down to money, in that people in very low paid/insecure jobs cannot even afford to stump up a couple of quid a week in fees.

Low pay and insecurity are hardly new and yet union membership has been declining for decades. No, the biggest reason why people don't join is what SF said - people don't have faith in unions to protect them. Something which is unfortunately all too true, partly due to the anti-union legislation the last 3-4 decades have brought partly because too many unions are themselves unwilling to fight for members.

That said I do think (former) nationality influences peoples views on unionism. There's been an quite large influx of Indian and Chinese academics into the Australian HE sector over the last 10+ years, union density is higher for the former than the latter. Probably a number of reasons for that but it'd be very strange if the nature of unions in China didn't play a role in unions are viewed.

 

[no-no]

for sure, its all about dividing the workforce isn't it, shaving where they can. In agency based warehouse/light industry stuff round here there was no talk of union ever, comments from a few old boys at factories I did brief stints in. Even those were along the lines of 'when we used to have a union' etc.

But I don't think migrant workers union membership is a measuring stick to judge their potential for solidarity (nor do you obvs, i think its no-no and slomo n this one). I think thats a very clinical and crude way to separate things given the reasons we know for this and the decline of strong unions in general among people born here with the magic NI number assigned. Nor indeed should we be actually measuring people up for solidarity. Thats not how it works. I don't share water with a thirsty person because I expect something, right.

It's not a judgement upon them. Union membership is on the decline all around anyway.

I do have a hard time with free movement though when it seems to supply vulnerable workers to industries who are more than willing to exploit the situation to the detriment of local workers wages.

And the consequences of turning away an eastern european worker would be no more than them still having the rest of the EU to look for work. it's not a moral issue for me.

 

[no-no]

Im not letting this pass. I live in same area.

Cosmopolitan Brixton is full of people who have less secure incomes.

As you should know Coldharbour Ward (which covers Brixton) is classified as deprived. Despite the gentrification of central Brixton.

The consquences that the less well off complain about arent immigrants but the social and ethnic cleansing of Brixton and London. Something you regularly take issue with on Brixton forum.

Its what we argue about on Brixton forum.

Just the immigration of the middle classes then?

The consequences of working class inmigration are also wage suppression within their trades.

multiple sectors are reporting rising wages because of a post Brexit staff shortage.

It's beyond debate at this point that increased immigration suppresses wages for the poorest amongst us.

I dont understand why it's acceptable to complain about middle class people raising prices but somehow it's bad to complain about working class people supressing wages.

I think both are valid complaints. People have a fair expectation to be able to find housing and we'll paid work in the areas they've grown up in, where their friends and families live.

 

[crossthebreeze]

All this talk of migrant workers and unions reminds me that I've been following some really interesting inspiring workplace struggles on facebook, many of which involve migrant workers - not specifically Eastern European migrant workers - though Gramsci has said there are Polish workers involved in the Ritzy/Picturehouse/Cineworld dispute. For example:

and:


and outsourced cleaners, gardeners, security officers, receptionists, porters, post-room workers, and audiovisual workers with IWUGB have balloted for strike action at University of London - and are raising a strike fund.

I'm not disputing that migrant workers aren't influenced by their experience of unions in the country they migrated from (though this must work both ways - and there'll be some people who have previous experience of a very active union tradition), but barriers to unionisation, solidarity, and industrial action like low pay, insecure work, and vulnerabilities due to migration status, can be overcome.

 

[no-no]

I read some posts here and wonder if I must be living in a different country. I'm a "local" and my partner is one of those European "migrants". I have Polish friends. As well as working with people from many different country and backgrounds. That's just normal life for me.

I really don't understand all this stuff about locals and

I really don't understand all this stuff about locals and immigrants.

It's not about having friends and partners from different countries.

It's about protecting wages. That might mean we don't allow in so many unskilled immigrants it doesn't mean we don't allow any in at all. It'll still be a multicultural nation.
Just one where people get a half decent wage...and one where there's a reason to invest in education again rather than subbing it out to EU nations.

British kids are at the bottom of European literacy tables but are expected to compete in a european job market.

You could present your post as :

I have middle class friends. I don't understand this gentrification argument.

But that would be using emotional rhetoric to sidestep the actual problem.

 

[Slo-mo]

I read some posts here and wonder if I must be living in a different country.

If you live in London, especially inner London, to an extent you do live in a different country. NOT, I would stress, a worse country, in some ways a better country, but a different one.

I don't really want to get too much into London vs rUK because it's somewhat off topic, and most of the issues are covered elsewhere, but it is a very different place to much of the rest of the country.

 

[no-no]

Another point about 'immigration'. When it happens within countries, displacing local populations, somehow it's not even a thing that govt should be involved with. It's 'good' somehow, or at the very least 'organic'. Migration across borders as opposed to migration within borders is an essentially arbitrary distinction, one that relies on an appeal to some form of nationalism to have a meaningful difference.

or a sense of geography and a desire not to have to work miles from home or have your wages suppressed by others who are willing to work abroad. I see it as pragmatic rather than nationalist.

Just as anti gentrification proponents arent anti middle class they're just concerned with being able to continue living in the area their lives are invested in.

You're right there is no difference between the gentrification and immigration arguments. Both are valid Imo

 

[Slo-mo]

There is nothing stopping this government or a future one to start repealing legislation around immigration.

A lot of immigration laws and bureaucracy are recent.
....

Bring back free movement for all those who live in the Commonwealth. As they used to have.

Are you sure? Free movement with the Carribbean is one thing, free movement with the whole Commonwealth quite another.

India has a population of 1.3 billion. Add in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka and you get 1.7 billion. The whole Commonwealth? 2.4 billion.

That's a lot of people with the right to come to the UK, even if only 1% of them took it up, we would have real issues to overcome.

 

[DotCommunist]

It's not a judgement upon them.

then why mention it at all? just in passing?

 

[teuchter]

There is nothing stopping this government or a future one to start repealing legislation around immigration.

A lot of immigration laws and bureaucracy are recent.

To start with get rid of the "hostile environment". End obligation of landlords , employers and NHS to check people's immigration status.

Bring back free movement for all those who live in the Commonwealth. As they used to have. What the Windrush issue does bring up is this countries legacy of colonialism. I know an older migrant from Pakistan. Resents the way laws were changed to make it more difficult to come here for others after him from ex colonies.

Retain free movement for EU citizens.

Reinstate the funding for ships to save those in the Med. Which was cut by government ( May was Home Secretary at the time). Cut as saving people from drowning was seen to encourage migrants. Better that they drown to put off others in future was government view.

Close down detention centres. UK locks up more people than other countries for long periods of time. Most of whom are asylum seekers.

End deporting of adults who came here as children.Under international obligation UK has to accept children for asylum. Once they reach adulthood they are deported. Even though they have grown up here.


This would be a start. Its entirely feasible to do within existing bureaucracy of government.

Are you in agreement with that list? As a start.

I agree with most of this list.

Freedom of movement for EU and Commonwealth citizens? Pre referendum I'd have said yes. Now I'm not so sure. I don't see it as having any negative consequences for me personally. It would be easy to say yes, but as I said earlier, maybe that is too easy for someone like me to say.

But - even saying yes to those two groups - fact is, we'd still have an immigration policy and there would still be people getting caught in it. The line would just be drawn differently.

 

[teuchter]

The only local Cllr present was Rachel ( see the photos,).

Jacqui Dyer also spoke.

 

[teuchter]

Im not letting this pass. I live in same area.

Cosmopolitan Brixton is full of people who have less secure incomes.

As you should know Coldharbour Ward (which covers Brixton) is classified as deprived. Despite the gentrification of central Brixton.

The consquences that the less well off complain about arent immigrants but the social and ethnic cleansing of Brixton and London. Something you regularly take issue with on Brixton forum.

Its what we argue about on Brixton forum.

Yes, gentrification is a big issue locally. I do not take issue with people complaining about the effects of that.

It's an issue that runs in parallel with the immigration issue. There are all sorts of reasons immigration is seen a bit differently in London compared to the rest of the UK. It's a large part of what makes London London, of course. Doesn't mean that people don't ever complain about it though. The picture you present of no-one in London complaining about immigration is not accurate. I've seen it. The last example I can think of was some Polish builders telling me they are thinking of going back to Poland now. I thought they were going to say it was because of Brexit. But it was because there are "too many imigrants" in London now.

 

[no-no]

then why mention it at all? just in passing?

because it's one of the factors that contributes to wage supression. the solution could be to try to increase migrant union membership or to restrict immigration with a points based system or a mix of the two.

We should be careful not to create harmful stereotypes, I get that but it's not something I'm wortied about on this forum. People here are capable of having the conversation.

 

[DotCommunist]

Scabs? certainly lacking in working class solidarity.

It's not a judgement upon them.

?