Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?

This is what they're all about.

The world is divided into oppressed and oppressor countries; a tiny handful of imperialist countries completely dominate, exploit and impoverish numerous underdeveloped countries. The price for this domination is paid by the masses in these countries, who are condemned to starvation, unemployment and brutal exploitation, while the imperialist amass unprecedented wealth in their drive for more and more profit.

British imperialism was the first, the trail blazer for imperialism long before the rise of its European and US rivals, and today is second only to US imperialism. A racist ideology was also developed to try to justify the barbaric treatment of the oppressed peoples by colonialism and imperialism. This worldwide carnage and exploitation by British imperialism is the basis for racism in Britain today.

Racism is the systematic oppression of the indigenous population of the countries conquered and exploited by imperialism in the first place. Racism and imperialism are inseparable. So having underdeveloped these oppressed countries, and supported dictatorships, imperialism creates the conditions (massive unemployment, poverty, repression, torture, lack of health care, illiteracy, etc.) where people are faced with a choice between staying in their countries and barely subsisting and starving to death or migrating to the imperialist nations in search of work and a better life. It doesn’t matter what the particular immediate reasons are for their migration, at the root of it, is the desire to escape the consequences of imperialism.
http://www.asylum-seekers-defence.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=Britain's_racist_immigration_controls

Immigration controls are not the solution. I doubt that those supporting greater controls could find anything that supports their theses (unless the information comes from the Daily Mail or the Daily Express).
 
nino_savatte said:
It is the nation-state that constructs national identity, not as part of the cultural fabric of a nation, but as a means of control and coercion. It is this homogenised construction of national identity that determines one’s suitability for inclusion in the nation’s societal formations. Should the person not conform to this pre-packaged identity, the consequences can be dire.

Its interesting that the only support you could find for this position was a sickly liberal christian website.

But what does the author (Vaughan Jones) actually conclude?

Immigration and asylum are best tackled within the broader context of conflict resolution and development. Strategies to deal with these must include methods of assisting the human victims. What a pity that Michael Howard and Tony Blair were not able to see the contradiction between their polite and principled campaigning on World Poverty Day and the brutalism of their approach to asylum and immigration.

Arresting the causes of migration at source and creating positive economic and cultural opportunities for exchange is the only realistic mechanism to “control” migration.

For all the talk about 'racism', Vaughan Jones actually wants to limit migration, though he sees immigration controls as immoral and relatively ineffective.
 
The piece nino quoted in post 481 is from Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism, the paper of the Revolutionary Communist Group.

I've noted in the past that they have shifted their analysis on immigration, and this piece reflects that shift.

Hence there are millions of destitute people from the oppressed nations who, either on a temporary or permanent basis, will work in the rich imperialist countries. This creates an international reserve pool of cheap labour that the British companies can turn to when they need to expand their labour force without affecting profits. Immigrant labour is very important to the British economy. For example, 45% of Chinese and Bangladeshi men work in the very low paid, hotel and restaurant sector, without them London’s hotel sector will grind to a halt. 40% of nurses in Britain are born abroad - without them the NHS will collapse. Hence immigrant labour is forced by imperialism into the worst jobs, for the lowest pay and longest hours and becomes a distinct oppressed layer within the British working class. Immigrants are the first to be fired in times of recession, and the first to be hired in times of boom.

As I said before there is a broad convergence in the left on this question, not divergence. If the RCG, who have long campaigned against immigration controls, can recognise the negative impacts of immigration then where does this leave groups like the SWP and Workers Power who simply plough on with 30 year old rhetoric?
 
Knotted said:
The piece nino quoted in post 481 is from Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism, the paper of the Revolutionary Communist Group.

I've noted in the past that they have shifted their analysis on immigration, and this piece reflects that shift.



As I said before there is a broad convergence in the left on this question, not divergence. If the RCG, who have long campaigned against immigration controls, can recognise the negative impacts of immigration then where does this leave groups like the SWP and Workers Power who simply plough on with 30 year old rhetoric?

Are the RCG for immigration controls now then? Because, that bit of the article you quote doesn't suggest they are and therefore their position would appear not to have shifted at all? :confused:
 
Lock&Light said:
It's amazing how impossible you and VP find it to actually do that, ie, ignore me.

I have nobody on ignore (even Brassicattack :D). My eyes just glaze over when I see his and btw your posts.
 
MC5 said:
Are the RCG for immigration controls now then? Because, that bit of the article you quote doesn't suggest they are and therefore their position would appear not to have shifted at all? :confused:

No, they are still very much against all immigration controls. However they have begun (from about 2 or 3 years ago) to acknowledge that there has been a large rise in immigration and that this is driven in part by the need for capitalists to exploit a more vulnerable workforce.

The SWP, Workers Power, CPGB (Weekly Worker), AWL and perhaps a few other groups will not say this. They deny there is an (objective) problem, which is in fact genuinely anti-immigrant. Immigrants are at the sharp end of any problems associated with further immigration.
 
Also another point with respect to the RCG. They are pessimistic about the progressive potential of large sections of the working class in imperialist countries. They call these sections the 'labour aristocracy' and they have a fairly rigid view of these sections. I think it follows that they see a lot more potential in the working classes of developing countries. Their position on borders and imperialism in general has shades of third worldism, and I think if I were to agree with them on the labour aristocracy and 'split in the working class' I would probably agree with them on immigration controls. I don't see them as opposing immigration controls out of political correctness, but rather their position flows naturally from a slightly unusual (but interesting in my view) analysis of world capitalism.
 
Fullyplumped said:
Yes, there are too many threads on immigration on UK P&P.

The thing that I find with them is that they tend to repeat themselves ad nauseum. It's the same tired "economic migrant/mass migration" argument time and time again. I wouldn't mind ,but not a single one of those who begin such threads ever back up their theses with evidence but will claim that their position is a universal one.
 
mmm, interesting, i wondered whether Nino was a FRFI barmpot,

btw, nice piece Nino, why not send it to Socialist Worker...


The piece nino quoted in post 481 is from Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism, the paper of the Revolutionary Communist Group.
 
treelover said:
mmm, interesting, i wondered whether Nino was a FRFI barmpot,

btw, nice piece Nino, why not send it to Socialist Worker...

So where is your evidence that immigration controls are not directed at people of colour? You don't have any and you will never be able to find any.

Interesting how you seized upon one article, isn't it? So what if the RCG is in broad agreement with me...so are many others.

Your evidence that immigration controls aren't racist, if you please.
 
Here's and excerpt from the manifesto of The No One is Illegal Group.

Immigration controls are not only about refugees. This is just the
latest government myth. Migrants and immigrants - those coming to
work and those wanting to join family here - along with visitors and
students are all equally subject to controls along with refugees.
Except unlike refugees they are not even entitled to the fake safety
net of the poor law. History is important. It is the immigrant
communities, especially of the Indian sub-continent and the
Caribbean, who from the 1970s launched a direct attack on immigration
control by organizing around campaigns against deportations and for
family reunion. It is these campaigns which laid the foundations for
the present movement in defence of refugees.

http://www.asylumbristol.org.uk/The manifesto of the No One Is Illegal Group.htm

So what does all of this lead to besides giving parties like the BNP (and UKIP) ammunition? It leads to poverty and exclusion.
 
More

Migration in History

Migration has always been a part of human history but population bor - ders and the nation state are a relatively new development. From the sixteenth century to the present day twice as many Europeans have moved to America and Africa than people from there have arrived in Europe. In the process they wiped out Tasmanian aborigines, most of the peoples of the Caribbean, decimated the Australian population by 80% and wiped out between 33% and 80% of native American people. In total there have been roughly 4 major periods of movement since the beginning of capitalism in the Sixteenth Century.

The first was the mass forced transportation of between 10 to 20 million people as slaves from Africa to assist in the development of everyone's favourite free world democracy. Up to 100 million slaves, in total, are estimated to have been transported from Africa throughout the world. The second wave was that of bonded or indentured labour from India and China. Though they signed a contract with their bosses, in practise they were little better then slaves. 30 million of such "workers" left India up to World War One and provided the work force for mines and plantations in Burma, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Mauritius, South Africa, Guyana and Jamaica. Several million Chinese were moved through South East Asia, the Pacific islands, the Caribbean and South Africa. Ironically the main use these workers and slaves were put to was to replace the peoples already wiped out by European colonists in the first place! The third major wave was the mass economic migration from Europe to America which began in the eighteenth century and peaked in the Twentieth. A total of about 60 million Europeans moved (or were transported) to America and Australaisa. The fourth major migration has been the beginnings of movement from South to North. According to UN estimates roughly 35 million people from the third world, including 6 million "illegals" have immigrated to Europe between 1960 and 1990. Though this figure seems relatively large it amounts only to 1% of the 1990 population of the third world moving over the entire 30 years and increased the population in the receiving countries by only 0.2% each year.
http://www.anarkismo.net/newswire.php?story_id=1145

Thus far, I have seen no supporting texts from our anti-immigrationist friends. Pourquoi?
 
treelover said:
mmm, interesting, i wondered whether Nino was a FRFI barmpot,

btw, nice piece Nino, why not send it to Socialist Worker...

From the Louis Theroux Meets the Spartacus League thread:

nino_savatte said:
Aren't they? What's their paper called? "Down With Racism. Down With Imperialism" or something. It's a shite read, from what I remember of it.

Nino's just scavenging the internet for anything that backs him.
 
Are you lot going to come up with some supporting bits of text for your thesis, or do I have to assume that you're all being dishonest?
 
Instead, L&L comes along with another snide remark that isn't related to the thread. :rolleyes:

It's a pity that he can't employ the same amount of time and energy to something more useful. Still, that's what life is like when one has a tiny mind. :D
 
I've gone back 7 pages and the number of threads on the subject of immigration is stunning. The threads are always started by the same people and usually contain the same information as the other threads. As usual, there are no quotes or links to the assertions made by them.

These are pretty recent.
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=199917&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=198317&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=191656&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=191600&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=191922&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=164037&highlight=immigration


Durutti holds the record for the most number of immigration threads. He is closely followed by tbaldwin

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=189048&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=189387&highlight=immigration

This is an interesting one. Here, the thread starter talks about “immigration free-for-alls”

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=173873&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=182959&highlight=immigration


This is a curious narrative that unwittingly betrays the author of the OP
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=173972&highlight=immigration


http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=169888&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=172537&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=131308&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=172880&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=175586&highlight=immigration
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=175751&highlight=immigration

This is from TonkaToy (now banned)
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=174629&highlight=immigration

This is a classic Baldwin thread.
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=174554&highlight=immigration

Here’s the OP

Quite an amusing front page from the Independent....There usual line on Immigration...."Its good for us anyone who says different is a nasty racist etc" trouble is they have just twisted facts reported by other papers....

Just 15,000 Poles were predicted to come by the govt....Its more like 600,000 or 1 Million....Funnily enough the good old Independent doesnt choose to focus on facts like that.....

Odd how he doesn’t actually cite the paper at all.
Another
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=172233&highlight=immigration


This thread asks “should the UK have immigration controls”? For the thread starter, it is a foregone conclusion.
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=167689&highlight=immigration

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=165687&highlight=immigration
 
Back
Top Bottom