Why do the left believe the govt on immigration but nothing else?

[nino_savatte]

It's just the definition of "race" i've been taught and have used all my life - based on skin colour. So discrimination against black people based on their skin colour is racist. Whereas taking the piss out of French people isn't racist, because it's not based on race, it's based on their nationality. In that sense, surely it's xenophobia?



Thought you said little. My mistake.

Just because you were "brought up" with that definition, doesn't mean that it's right.

How's your take on the concept of identity?

 

[mk12]

Just because you were "brought up" with that definition, doesn't mean that it's right.

I didn't say it was - we all argue from positions we hold, which we have formulated as we have grown up. I never thought of Poles as a separate race before, that's all. That's why there is a disagreement here.

 

[nino_savatte]

I didn't say it was - we all argue from positions we hold, which we have formulated as we have grown up. I never thought of Poles as a separate race before, that's all. That's why there is a disagreement here.

Well you've been using it as an excuse since you got here. Which makes me think that you're still attached to the notion.

 

[mk12]

of course I am - I see anti-irish discrimination as xenophobic, nationalsit whatever. Not racist. Whereas discriminating against black people to me is racist.

 

[nino_savatte]

of course I am - I see anti-irish discrimination as xenophobic, nationalsit whatever. Not racist. Whereas discriminating against black people to me is racist.

You're really not making any sense. No wonder everyone else has fucked off. I'm out of here too.

 

[mk12]

You're really not making any sense.

It's pretty simple stuff Racism is discrimination based on skin colour?

 

[belboid]

Why? Come on, try and come up with an actual defense of that position - a reason why I would suddenly be part of a different race if I got a tan. You could also try and actually respond to the criticisms put to you of your position, you havent done that either. Just keep repeating its what you were brought up to believe. So fucking what? I was brought up to believe in a catholic god, so should I now argue that there is such a thing, and that any god is that god? It makes no sense whatsoever.

Come on, defend your position if you can.

 

[In Bloom]

Now if you had any fucking wit, you would argue that the joke about Poles wasn't racist cause there isn;t the same historical context, polish people have ben held as sub human etc etc, and therefore the joke is more in common with ones about scousers or the french.

Edit: Nevermind, didn't see your post shortly after this one.

Though it is true that Polish people have, historically, been subject to racial discrimination too.

 

[In Bloom]

I'm trying to better understand your arguments. You said white australians aren't stopped. Are white Irish?

I'm trying to get to the bottom of your argument that race isn't based on skin colour.

You're being a little simplistic. Do you not think that somebody with an Eastern European accent is more likely to be subject to harrassment at borders or from police than somebody with, say, an American accent?

 

[mk12]

The only possible way of defending a concept like race is by pointing to the common sense definition of it - it's not something I can prove or anything, it's going by the commonly used definition of it. From where i'm sitting, it just seems like you are trying to concoct a whole new definition of the term race.

I guess the only defence of my position I have is to point to dictionary definitions.

The most widely observed races are those based on skin color, facial features, ancestry, and genetics.

But, as your arguments make clear,

Conceptions of race, as well as specific racial groupings, are often controversial due to their impact on social identity hence identity politics.

Do you not think that somebody with an Eastern European accent is more likely to be subject to harrassment at borders or from police than somebody with, say, an American accent?

Yes - there is evidence of that. The media whipped up a campaign based around the notion that Poles were going to come over in their thousands. I think the area of disagreement here is about whether this represents "racism" or not.

 

[revol68]

Edit: Nevermind, didn't see your post shortly after this one.

Though it is true that Polish people have, historically, been subject to racial discrimination too.

yeah of course, but again it's relative to the context eg in Britain polsih people have not been generally seen as racial inferior.

 

[In Bloom]

yeah of course, but again it's relative to the context eg in Britain polsih people have not been generally seen as racial inferior.

Fair point.

Though like you say, that is starting to change, recently.

 

[In Bloom]

Yes - there is evidence of that. The media whipped up a campaign based around the notion that Poles were going to come over in their thousands. I think the area of disagreement here is about whether this represents "racism" or not.

I suppose you could argue that it's xenophobia, rather than racism and that it's based on their "otherness" as recently arrived migrants from another culture, rather than people seeing them as a separate race.

It strikes me as unnecessary semantics, to a large extent. To be honest, this whole argument is a bit silly, IMO. Does it particularly matter whether it's racism or xenophobia?

 

[ZAMB]

Returning to the topic of the OP, did anyone else switch the news on today, see that big red banner across the screen "TERROR PLOT" and think "Isn't that convenient"? The day after Israel announces that it's moving even further into Lebanon we get a complete blackout of news from Lebanon and Gaza - I watched News 24 for about an hour, and there was not even a mention - although what was obvious was that they had damn all info about this so-called 'terror plot' - they were even saying that at this stage they didn't know anything and couldn't confirm if the danger was real. Nevertheless, they did all they could to pump up the 'fear factor' - maybe they're hoping that we'll just forget what is happening in the rest of the world.

 

[Hawkeye Pearce]

Race and nationalism are total myths constructed over time. But sadly ones that have persisted. The important thing to remember in this whole debate is how religions try to foster a sense of cultural superiority in their followers. This is not just one religion but pretty much all of them, if you've ever read some of the unhinged rubbish uttered by christian-nazi types from both england and the US, you'll know what i mean. The important thing for those of us who believe in equalitarian politics of all shades is to stress that most differences between people ar fundamentally nothing compared to what we share. And yes that does mean openly stating that something is reactionary when it is, no matter who it offends. For if we are ever going to improve this world of ours even in the slightest reactionary beliefs such as religion must be combatted and barriers errected between people torn down.

 

[belboid]

The only possible way of defending a concept like race is by pointing to the common sense definition of it - it's not something I can prove or anything, it's going by the commonly used definition of it. From where i'm sitting, it just seems like you are trying to concoct a whole new definition of the term race.

but Matt, you have actually ignored many of the points in the definitions you've quoted to the point where you had to add the bit about skin colour in one instance!

& as IB points out, what is the point you are actually trying to make? Racism as a construct of capitalism is used as a way of dividing the working-class, skin colour was the really easy and obvious way to do this, but it was far from being the only one. Thus stories about jews, irish, southern europeans all having shared, common characteristics which were passed down generation to generation.

& it's not me (or IB or anyone else) who is suddenly concocting a whole new definition, those definitions have always been changing. And why? Because there's no such thing as race.

 

[Furtwangler]

Because there's no such thing as race.

How would you charaterise the geographically-based morphological and genetic variation which does occur across humankind? Clines? Clusters? Populations?

 

[nino_savatte]

It's pretty simple stuff Racism is discrimination based on skin colour?

You're all over the shop, matey.

 

[In Bloom]

How would you charaterise the geographically-based morphological and genetic variation which does occur across humankind? Clines? Clusters? Populations?

Hows about "variation"?

Just a thought

 

[belboid]

How would you charaterise the geographically-based morphological and genetic variation which does occur across humankind? Clines? Clusters? Populations?

wtf are 'clines'?

I wouldnt really bother - 'minor differences' perhaps.

 

[cathal marcs]

Matt you dont seem to be able to divorce the practice of racism with the ideology of "race". His abusive manner aside I am in agreement with some of what Revol is saying.

You can still believe in the practice of racism without believing that humans can be categorised into "races" based on phenotypical differences mainly skin colour. Robert Miles has some excellent views on racism and also looks at the case of racism carried out by those percieved as being the same colour.

Try Racism and Migrant Labour by Robert Miles or well any of his books but im sure its thisone with the case study of anti Irish racism in Scotland if it isn´t its Racism:After Race Relations.

Also Kenan Malik has some good essays on his website

http://www.kenanmalik.com/

 

[durruti02]

Actually its what blair says when he's challenged on it first he'll state the economic case for immigration, then he'll go on about how the state needs new powers to achieve "controlled immigration". The point is that its a double game they are playing here. Mouthing off about the need for "tough" new laws to get a good headline in the Mail/Sun and at the same time turning a blind eye to the underground economy of workers who keep so many companies profits high as they can be paid very little and got rid of very easily. Thats why I agree with the point that the point about unionisation. Unionise all these workers and it'll make it harder for the capitalists to exploit them and harder for the government to create such an easy scapegoat if employers were forced to pay everyone on the same rate whether they were migrants or existing working class communities.

spot on bruv .. i am continually amazed that the left can not see that the state/neo libs might use a double bluff!

and that is the point of the poll

PEOPLE!! THE STATE LIES!!! .. and on immigration as much as WMD ..

 

[durruti02]

tbaldwin and duranti06 are a pair of right-wing trolls.

muppet

 

[durruti02]

That's what I was thinking.

its not a real poll .. its to get people thinking WHY we disbelive the state on everything EXCEPT immigration ..

 

[belboid]

its not a real poll .. its to get people thinking WHY we disbelive the state on everything EXCEPT immigration ..

except you havent provided an iota of evidence that people do believe the state on immigration.

 

[durruti02]

whats also interesting is how this thread has beend slightly derailed into talk of race ( which the left always feel more comfortable with )

when the issue is HOW immigration is being used in a OPENLY CLASSIST way ..

 

[belboid]

possibly because you've posted so many fucking threads on the same subject that this one - one without any basis in reality - has been treated with the disdain it deserves?

 

[durruti02]

A ..It seems that some of us agree that immigration is mainly another scam run by the ruling class at the expense of both those who come over here and are forced into sometimes dangerous and horrendously underpaid work and the working class as well.

B ..So my question is what is the best way to approach this issue from a standpoint that opposes capitalism? As it is clear that the so called far left are largely failing to do this in any remotely satisfactory way?

HP i agree with A..

EXCEPT that the main left current in this country the SWP and its fellow travellers ( who i call PC liberal lefties ) still do not get it!! .. and they do have an influence out of all proportion to their size, on the left and how it is seen generally .. and have had a disasterous effect in this area along with their foolish allies of the ANL/UAF etc

B .. well first i think we need to be honest about immigration and why it is happenning .. i think only then will people take the left seriously ..

as i have stated repeatedly ( and incredibly been ridiculed by swpers who should theoretically agree) i belive their is a simple and clear w/c solution

first that the trade unions/Left come out and actually say what is going on

second a mass TU/Left campaign inside and outside of work/industry against casualisation/privaisation and specifically against recruitment abroad / and or for lower wages than the going rate

third a campaign in the left/TU's for revival of the closed shop

fourth a campaign against firms using cheap imported labour to cut costs ( as was done with the seaworkers Irish Ferries campaigns)

fifth to campaign that both work and housing should be allocated locally to sons and daughters ( regardless of race .. whatever that may be ) to create sustainable communities


and finally, but only as part of the above, a campaign for legitimisation of illegal workers so they can be recruited into unions and thus AGAINST immigration controls ... this should be combined with a campaign to confront racism and to explain that it is not immigrants who are the problem but capitalism that uses immigration and ABUSES immigrants



and i can guarantee there is not a single thing in these solutions that the neo libs can agree with ..

 

[durruti02]

possibly because you've posted so many fucking threads on the same subject that this one - one without any basis in reality - has been treated with the disdain it deserves?

you are on a losing battle mate .. not only in the w/c which thinks your position ludicrous but on urban as well .. the numbers of people who seem to think you are wrong increases constantly ..

 

[nino_savatte]

Durutti is a rather odd name for such a right wing reactionary, don't you think?