Too many immigration threads on UK P&P?

[phildwyer]

There's a subtle difference.

Is there now? Why'd you leave the Home Office grandad?

 

[ViolentPanda]

No seriously, were you ever in a war?

A war? No.

 

[phildwyer]

A war? No.

Didn't think so. Care to respond to my question about your sudden departure from the Home Office?

 

[ViolentPanda]

Didn't think so.

From which you infer...?

Care to respond to my question about your sudden departure from the Home Office?

Ill-health.

 

[phildwyer]

From which you infer...?

From which I infer I don't believe a fucking word you say mate.

Ill-health.

Depends what you mean, surely?

 

[urbanrevolt]

Sadly i reckon your probably telling the truth...But there are millions of people who are not all right wing/racist etc who are against economic migration for lots of reasons. Ordinary trade unionists and people from all classes and races.
If the Left ignores those people it has only itself to blame for its lack of influence.

I agree with t'baldwin here only in the very specific sense that the left should address the concerns of these ordinary trade unionists and workers from different races who may have feelings of resentment towards immigrants or feel that migrants are undercutting their jobs.

How should we address it? Partly by taking seriously the issues of organisation on the ground and partly making sure we address the problems of racism and state attacks on immigrants' rights to stay and work, in the workplaces, organising over bread and butter issues, and showing how the struggles that affect ordinary settled working class people black and white also affect in similar ways migrant workers (black and white) and actually by calling on the unions to organsie migrants and supporting migrants entry into the organised struggles of the wider working class we all benefit. Migrants don't cause our problmes even when they are being used as a tool of the bosses in particular situations.

The recently unprecedented wave of migration into this country is partly an effect of the economic upturn. We should seek to organise the whole working class including iteinerant labour and their families.

I repeat t'baldwin the question you have consistently evaded:
"Militant trade unionism and a united working class is necessary to fight against low wages, to fight job cuts, to fight casualisation.

If the unions don;t also fight for the rights of migrant labour, to fight against immigration controls and thew shit wages and conditions of illegal jobs then the bosses will obviously exploit any division in the working class.

Tbaldwin and his 'left' friends never answer these points."

 

[ViolentPanda]

From which I infer I don't believe a fucking word you say mate.

That's fine by me, because what you believe is a matter of complete indifference to me, sweaty-palms.

Depends what you mean, surely?

Ill-health means ill-health.

 

[urbanrevolt]

No doesn't seem to address any of these points either. Anyways I'll look in the morning.

 

[phildwyer]

Ill-health means ill-health.

Sorry, I don't believe you. I think you're full of shit. You've given contradictory accounts of your "ill health" too many times. I don't think you were in the army either. I don't think you live on the corner of Tulse Hill Rd and Trinity Rise either. I think you're a fucking liar. Why'd you *really* leave the Home Office grandad?

 

[ViolentPanda]

I agree with t'baldwin here only in the very specific sense that the left should address the concerns of these ordinary trade unionists and workers from different races who may have feelings of resentment towards immigrants or feel that migrants are undercutting their jobs.

How should we address it? Partly by taking seriously the issues of organisation on the ground, in the workplaces, organising over bread and butter issues, and showing how the struggles that affect ordinary settled working class people black and white also affect in similar ways migrant workers (black and white) and actually by calling on the unions to organsie migrants and supporting migrants entry into the organised struggles of the wider working class we all benefit. Migrants don't cause our problmes even when they are being used as a tool of the bosses in particular situations.

The problem is that many trade unions are no longer in the position to address "bread and butter issues", because they no longer operate the same sort of active recruitment policies as they used to, and the smaller the unions' pool of prospective membership gets, the more the unions will consolidate and merge, and the less they'll be able to address those "bread and butter issues".
A vicious circle, unfortunately.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sorry, I don't believe you. I think you're full of shit. You've given contradictory accounts of your "ill health" too many times. I don't think you were in the army either. I don't think you live on the corner of Tulse Hill Rd and Trinity Rise either. I think you're a fucking liar. Why'd you *really* leave the Home Office grandad?

I don't care what you believe, phil.

I don't need your belief to validate myself, in fact I don't need the belief of any second-rate academic hack to validate myself, especially not one with hands like yours.

 

[becky p]

I agree with t'baldwin here only in the very specific sense that the left should address the concerns of these ordinary trade unionists and workers from different races who may have feelings of resentment towards immigrants or feel that migrants are undercutting their jobs.

How should we address it? Partly by taking seriously the issues of organisation on the ground and partly making sure we address the problems of racism and state attacks on immigrants' rights to stay and work, in the workplaces, organising over bread and butter issues, and showing how the struggles that affect ordinary settled working class people black and white also affect in similar ways migrant workers (black and white) and actually by calling on the unions to organsie migrants and supporting migrants entry into the organised struggles of the wider working class we all benefit. Migrants don't cause our problmes even when they are being used as a tool of the bosses in particular situations.

The recently unprecedented wave of migration into this country is partly an effect of the economic upturn. We should seek to organise the whole working class including iteinerant labour and their families.

I repeat t'baldwin the question you have consistently evaded:
"Militant trade unionism and a united working class is necessary to fight against low wages, to fight job cuts, to fight casualisation.

If the unions don;t also fight for the rights of migrant labour, to fight against immigration controls and thew shit wages and conditions of illegal jobs then the bosses will obviously exploit any division in the working class.

Tbaldwin and his 'left' friends never answer these points."

Do you think that kind of preaching is going to do any good? Do you think that occasionally that people who disagree with you actually have a point?

 

[phildwyer]

I don't care what you believe, phil.

Sure you don't. That's why you waste your miserable life making up Walter Mitty stories to impress strangers on the internet. No-one from these boards has ever actually *met* you, am I right? Hmmm now I wonder why that might be?

 

[becky p]

I don't care what you believe, phil.

I don't need your belief to validate myself, in fact I don't need the belief of any second-rate academic hack to validate myself, especially not one with hands like yours.

First rate criticism Private.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Sure you don't. That's why you waste your miserable life making up Walter Mitty stories to impress strangers on the internet. No-one from these boards has ever actually *met* you, am I right?
Hmmm now I wonder why that might be?

My miserable life, eh?

Yep, I'm so very miserable, especially watching you flounder and lash out like an epileptic halibut.

 

[ViolentPanda]

First rate criticism Private.

Thank you.

 

[phildwyer]

First rate criticism Private.

Private Panda (retd.) to you. An army of one.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Private Panda (retd.) to you. An army of one.

You're quite entertaining occasionally, phil.

Doubtless in spite of yourself.

 

[Lock&Light]

I don't care what you believe, phil.

It's your readiness to disbelieve and rubbish others, that makes me think that you care very much indeed.

 

[treelover]

Agree with Becky on U/R' post: it's typical Trot politics by numbers, it takes absolutely no cognisance of how 'ordinary people' (not just 'the workers' or that patronising term, 'layers') feel , how they experience changes, the concrete effects, not political theory, on their lives of such seismic change. That on some things, god forbid they might be right and the dwindling ranks of the far left may be wrong. Thank god, you are so ineffectual, actually no, you are in danger of becoming the best recruiting sergeants for the far right.


btw, the reason i don't argue at length is because I don't have all the answers
all I know is we are seeing historical change and the left seems not to want to address the issues unless guided by a 19th C guru.

 

[chilango]

Agree with Becky on U/R' post: it's typical Trot politics by numbers, it takes absolutely no cognisance of how 'ordinary people' (not just 'the workers' or that patronising term, 'layers') feel , how they experience changes, the concrete effects, not political theory, on their lives of such seismic change. That on some things, god forbid they might be right and the dwindling ranks of the far left may be wrong. Thank god, you are so ineffectual, actually no, you are in danger of becoming the best recruiting sergeants for the far right.


btw, the reason i don't argue at length is because I don't have all the answers
all I know is we are seeing historical change and the left seems not to want to address the issues unless guided by a 19th C guru.

2 points

1) "ordinary people" is no more or less patronising than "the workers" or "layers". Its just another generalisation.

2) seismic change? Hardly. I suggest you read some history. Migration, even on a large scale, is NOT a new thing.

 

[nino_savatte]

I`m referring to the likes of tbaldwin, treelover et al. who define themselves as on the left.

For people who regard themselves as part of the "left", they spend a great deal of time and effort undermining the left. Though one suspects that all these criticisms of the "left" have some sort of ideological basis...but none of them are prepared to come clean about what form that ideology takes.

 

[nino_savatte]

I understand that people who claim to be socialists who use populist as some kind of insult are twats.
What do they want an unpopular form of Socialism?

You continue to labour under the delusion that you actually have some contribution to make. As this post proves' you are not serious about discussing anything if it doesn't conform to your narrow views. You cannot challenge any of my points and all you can do is hurl shite about...or make up lies about my politics.

You're a liar and a troll. You're neither a socialist nor an internationalist.

 

[nino_savatte]

But to give you a better (in my opinion) version of internationalism than the two you presented, how about socialist internationalism? World wide working class solidarity without any ideolotgical frippery. No nationalism, no supra-nationalism, no pitting the interests of immigrants against non migrants, no programmatic scripture disguised as morality, no lots of other things just the 'communication and co-operation between workingmen's societies existing in different countries and aiming at the same end' to quote the general rules of the International Workingmens' Association of 1864. Of course founding an international on these lines is another question...

Isn't this what I was talking about? Okay, I didn't express it in quite the same terms as you, but I see nationalism as an obstacle.

 

[ViolentPanda]

2 points

1) "ordinary people" is no more or less patronising than "the workers" or "layers". Its just another generalisation.

True, but not quite as offensive (to people who don't understand the term) as "lumpenproleteriat".

2) seismic change? Hardly. I suggest you read some history. Migration, even on a large scale, is NOT a new thing.

Scale is the hinge on which many people nowadays hang their concerns, though. It's perhaps difficult for people to appreciate that 40,000 Hugenots or 120,000 east European Jews historically made a bigger impact on resources etc, than current levels of immigration do.

 

[nino_savatte]

Do you seriously think i hate immigrants?

Well, you're not too keen on them - are you?

 

[ViolentPanda]

You continue to labour under the delusion that you actually have some contribution to make. As this post proves' you are not serious about discussing anything if it doesn't conform to your narrow views. You cannot challenge any of my points and all you can do is hurl shite about...or make up lies about my politics.

You're a liar and a troll. You're neither a socialist nor an internationalist.

It's a pity balders hasn't grasped the difference between "popular" and "populist", but it's entertaining too.

 

[nino_savatte]

It's a pity balders hasn't grasped the difference between "popular" and "populist", but it's entertaining too.

Innit? I love the way he continues to dig an even deeper hole for himself.

 

[tbaldwin]

Well, you're not too keen on them - are you?

You really are a prat. What immigrants do you think i'm not too keen on exactly?

 

[tbaldwin]

Sorry, I don't believe you. I think you're full of shit. You've given contradictory accounts of your "ill health" too many times. I don't think you were in the army either. I don't think you live on the corner of Tulse Hill Rd and Trinity Rise either. I think you're a fucking liar. Why'd you *really* leave the Home Office grandad?

Phil. I reckon VP is telling the truth when he says he's based south of the river...But maybe not that far south?