Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?

[nino_savatte]

Recently there have been a rash of immigration threads on UK P&P and one suspects that the motivation behind starting such threads isn't done entirely for reasons of proper discussion. Some of those starting such threads claim that they are not "anti-immigrant" but are against the idea of so-called" economic migration". However when one unpacks what the thread-starter has posted, it becomes clear that they have some rather quaint ideas regarding capitalism, borders, nation-states and migration that verges on the xenophobic. Some posters will claim that they are "internationalists" but will maintain that "economic migration" is wrong and that tighter controls should be imposed at borders and people should be prevented from emigrating, but they offer no solutions to the 'problem'.

For me, there appears to be two types of internationalism: there is one version that works to preserve the concept of the nation-state and, rather than working for the abolition of states and borders, works within a capitalistic framework and stresses "co-operation" between nation-states. There is another form, to which I would subscribe, that maintains that the nation-state is part of the problem and borders need to come down for the sake of world peace and freedom. The former embraces the classic liberal notion of "free trade", while the latter embraces "fair trade".

Those who call for greater "border controls" while calling themselves "socialists" ignore the bigger picture: namely the way in which a country's markets can be dominated by a larger global power in the name of "free trade". Economic migration is caused by the effect of neo-liberal economic policies that have been imposed on that country by the US. To blame immigrants for the economic malaise of a particular nation-state is nothing more or less than scapegoating.

 

[JimPage]

agreed, the anti immigration nonsense on here serve no purpose or interest. i thought U75 had a no platform for racists and fascists policy- is there any reason why this in not being enforced?

 

[nino_savatte]

agreed, the anti immigration nonsense on here serve no purpose or interest. i thought U75 had a no platform for racists and fascists policy- is there any reason why this in not being enforced?

That's a good question. I think a lot of threads started on immigration tend to be carefully worded so as not to lead one to suspect the true motives of the thread-starter. However when one gets close to the truth, the thread-starter (and their mates) will either hurl abuse or try to evade the points put to them.

Behind these threads lies the ugly face of racism.

 

[treelover]

yeah, so start another one eh....

 

[nino_savatte]

yeah, so start another one eh....

"Another one"?

 

[teuchter]

For me, there appears to be two types of internationalism: there is one version that works to preserve the concept of the nation-state and, rather than working for the abolition of states and borders, works within a capitalistic framework and stresses "co-operation" between nation-states. There is another form, to which I would subscribe, that maintains that the nation-state is part of the problem and borders need to come down for the sake of world peace and freedom. The former embraces the classic liberal notion of "free trade", while the latter embraces "fair trade".

Would it not be fair to say that there would be a third approach, which would support the idea of open borders but would operate a free trade / capitalistic system? It would seem to be that the ultimate free trade / free market type approach would get rid of the nation state to create a totally "free" global employment and trade market, without the interference of import/export restrictions, subsidised industries, etc. I'm not saying it would work or be a good idea, but true "free trade" and closed borders don't necessarily go hand in hand ... quite the opposite, I would have thought.

Also I don't see how socialism is going to work in a world without nation states, unless we have some kind of worldwide socialist mega-government ... crikey.

 

[JimPage]

yeah, so start another one eh....

nah the point here is to start a thread to end the others. simply, racist voews shouldnt be given a platform, and opposition to migration is racism

 

[mk12]

I disagree. It's a big issue for a lot of people in this country. More so than inner-left bickering, union motions, George Galloway, stop the war coalition etc etc.

racist voews shouldnt be given a platform, and opposition to migration is racism

you fool. 98% if people who support border controls are racist I suppose.

 

[JimPage]

you fool. 98% if people who support border controls are racist I suppose.

no. 100%

 

[mk12]

excellent

 

[N_igma]

I reckon we should put all these threads on a boat and send them home.

 

[treelover]

Ah, so it begins, closing down of debate, lets see what others think..


btw, why not name names, ping that racism radar....

nah the point here is to start a thread to end the others. simply, racist voews shouldnt be given a platform, and opposition to migration is racism
Reply With Quote

 

[becky p]

That's a good question. I think a lot of threads started on immigration tend to be carefully worded so as not to lead one to suspect the true motives of the thread-starter. However when one gets close to the truth, the thread-starter (and their mates) will either hurl abuse or try to evade the points put to them.

Behind these threads lies the ugly face of racism.

Are you sure your motivation for this thread is not how one poster cruelly exposed your lies on another thread?

There are many differing views on immigration.Do you wish to see only one expressed on urban.It's perhaps less than honest to insinuate that people with opposing views to yours are Racist.

 

[treelover]

He's not insinuating, he's doing a fucking call out!

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I reckon we should put all these threads on a boat and send them home.

Yeah, they don't belong here, they've got a different culture innit, they come over here, they take our bandwidth...

For the record, while I am often violently opposed to some of the things which pop up in these threads, it's not my place as a mod to dump things simply because I don't like them. (I'm not sure many of you would like it if I did do that ) There are some which are obviously entryism which get chucked out, but others get left behind for debate and whatever abuse they deserve.

I don't actually think there have been that many immigration threads recently compared to the ridiculous flood of them which did occur a few months back.

 

[Hocus Eye.]

I don't think that those posters who have been identified in the OP by their style but not named and who are against migration, are necessarily racist. They could be but maybe are just against foreigners generally. There used to be a crude expression that went something like "'Wogland' begins at Calais" which was disgustingly racist but also extending the hostility to everyone who was not British. I doubt if our posters are in that frame of mind though.

I know that the posters who write against migration are concerned with the welfare of the 'working class' and much use is made of the word 'local' when it comes to housing and services. It is not clear however if they really mean 'indigenous white working class' and how far 'local' extends. Do they object to people from other towns coming to work and live in their locality?

The emotions around these issues make it difficult to debate in a logical way. Reading between the lines of a post is not an exact science and maybe that is why many political threads end up as a battle of insults. Name calling and character assassination also close down debate in the same way that accusations of racism do.

 

[Pigeon]

I don't actually think there have been that many immigration threads recently compared to the ridiculous flood of them which did occur a few months back.

I agree.

And i don't think any of the usual suspects who habitually post about immigration are racists, though one or two of them are thick fuckers, beyond doubt.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Are you sure your motivation for this thread is not how one poster cruelly exposed your lies on another thread?

To be fair, tbaldwin didn't quite do that, did he. he just made a lot of "noise" but as usual produced no proof!

There are many differing views on immigration.Do you wish to see only one expressed on urban.It's perhaps less than honest to insinuate that people with opposing views to yours are Racist.

But that's not what's said in the OP, is it? In fact the only way you can draw that conclusion is if you read the OP as being aimed at a specific poster, and for you to do so would surely be a function of your prejudice?

IMO there are plenty of posters who are pro-borders, some of whom articulate a well-reasoned (though perhaps rather instrumental) argument for their position. There are others who don't, and the problem with not being able to reasonably articulate why you hold a particular position is that it leaves you open to people thinking that you hold that position because of ignorance.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I agree.

And i don't think any of the usual suspects who habitually post about immigration are racists, though one or two of them are thick fuckers, beyond doubt.

Uh-huh.
IMHO the problem is that while they are not racist, their arguments sometimes coincide with those used by racists, a point which I've mentioned before which tends to draw a reaction of "are you calling me a racist?" . A reaction which tends to reinforce the perception that one or two of them are indeed "thick fuckers".

 

[Julie]

Behind these threads lies the ugly face of racism.

Agreed.

 

[nino_savatte]

Are you sure your motivation for this thread is not how one poster cruelly exposed your lies on another thread?

There are many differing views on immigration.Do you wish to see only one expressed on urban.It's perhaps less than honest to insinuate that people with opposing views to yours are Racist.

What "lies"?

The views expressed on immigration tend to follow the usual "they're over here taking our jobs" line.

It's perhaps less than honest to insinuate that people with opposing views to yours are Racist

What rubbish. I tend to find that people who trot out this line tend resent the fact that their views are being challenged and will always claim that they are being labelled "racists".

 

[nino_savatte]

He's not insinuating, he's doing a fucking call out!

Nonsense, this is not aimed at a particular poster.

 

[Lock&Light]

Nonsense, this is not aimed at a particular poster.

If that's true, it's also true that very few of your postings are not aimed at a particular poster.

 

[nino_savatte]

Pay attention

Lock&Light
This message is hidden because Lock&Light is on your ignore list.

 

[nino_savatte]

Agreed.

The subtext is always there. Mind you, not many would actually admit to being racist. It's a little like admitting to being a kiddy fiddler.

 

[Lock&Light]

Except, you're just like VP in that respect. You find it totally impossible to ignore me.

 

[nino_savatte]

Uh-huh.
IMHO the problem is that while they are not racist, their arguments sometimes coincide with those used by racists, a point which I've mentioned before which tends to draw a reaction of "are you calling me a racist?" . A reaction which tends to reinforce the perception that one or two of them are indeed "thick fuckers".

Sure, and many will throw out that line or will claim - like becky p has here - this:

Do you wish to see only one expressed on urban.It's perhaps less than honest to insinuate that people with opposing views to yours are Racist.

"It's because you disagree with me", has to be one of the weakest defences. But if one disagrees with the argument, shouldn't one be entitled to challenge such views?

 

[becky p]

"It's because you disagree with me", has to be one of the weakest defences. But if one disagrees with the argument, shouldn't one be entitled to challenge such views?

Your entitled to challenge any view you like.But equally other people are also entitled to your views.
Your insinuation that those who disagree with you on immigration are racist,appears to be a attempt to close down debate.
Given the evidence of how you lie on the NHS thread,its perhaps time you owned up to your own motivations.

 

[Lock&Light]

its perhaps time you owned up to your own motivations.

Don't hold your breath!

 

[Aldebaran]

Yeah, they don't belong here, they've got a different culture innit, they come over here, they take our bandwidth...

Of course reason why I invaded the site stealthlike and try to stay invisible as U75 cyberspace immigrant.

salaam.