Immigration in the UK

[Lyev]

I'm so fed up of the people in Britain that say stupid stuff like "Them polish people are stealing our jobs". It really pisses me off. There's so much that's blatantly wrong about that statement.

I draw the line at illegal immigrants, obviously, but still, these people are fleeing their own countries because of famine or war and have probably had to deal with great hardship to get to Britain, only to be kicked out again. So can't we at least find some compassion for these people, rather than turn them away?

Back to the polish thing, or any other legal immigrant. Where the hell does this prejudice stem from? If anything we should welcome people that come to Britain to do work. Why turn them away for the sake of a silly prejudice? Maybe someone might say that there are immigrants that don't work and "leech of our benefits" and they should be "kicked out", does that mean every British person that doesn't work should be "kicked out"?

One other point is that I moved from London to Somerset about 6 years ago and it's safe to say that London is a whole lot more culturally diverse. I don't remember any discrimination there, or at least barely any. I was in a class with many different ethnicities, whereas in my current secondary school there's about 2 blacks kids in the whole school out of 1200 and pretty much everyone else is Caucasian.

So if anything immigration is a good thing because it brings new ethnicities and cultures into certain parts of the UK which helps stop stupid prejudices. To add, Britain has been invaded loads of times (Saxons, Romans, Normans, Vikings) so how do you define nationality anyway? To be a true Brit do you have to trace back to Celtic ancestry? Or are you British if you're Pakistani but have lived here for several generations?

I've probably waffled on too much and this topic might have been covered already, but replies are much appreciated. Oh, and please correct me if I've made any mistakes. :)

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

I draw the line at illegal immigrants,

Why?

[Lyev]

Because they're against the law I guess, although I did after that say "find compassion" I think.

Although now that you mention it I don't really see why they should be illegal, I'll look into it. Maybe the government should help them rather than just kick them out. Thanks for questioning that.

[ls]

Because they're against the law I guess, although I did after that say "find compassion" I think.

Although now that you mention it I don't really see why they should be illegal, I'll look into it. Maybe the government should help them rather than just kick them out. Thanks for questioning that.

There's not much to look into. They are usually people who have been badly treated where they come from.. so they come over, then they are (sometimes worsely) treated when they come here.

The sheer volume of people who end up dead while trying to go to a country, to claim asylum seeker status just proves that border controls are effectively in themselves genocidal.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2004/04/18/1089584.htm


The Canary Islands are less than 200 kilometres off the African coast and each year thousands of illegal immigrants try to cross the Atlantic in boats that are unseaworthy.

One Moroccan human rights group estimates 4,000 people have died since 1997 while trying to reach the Canary Islands or southern Spain.

http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=617938

http://www.france24.com/en/20080827-illegal-african-immigrants-drown-malta-europe

Then why move them closer inland when you can you know, exploit them for the full cost of their labour.. and their lives?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lancashire/4259226.stm

[Pol Pot]

You are irriteted by negative sentiments about foreigners, foreign workforce and the other things that are linked together...

My opinion is that immigration must have a benefit for the working people of the nation that is receiving those who are immigrating. That means that immigration for the sake of capitalists who only want cheaper workforce is not the right reason for this. I am against disciminating them, but the FACT is that they are cheaper to hire than brits for the same jobs. Those people are not guilty for the injustices that capitalism creates. And elites avoid the blame so people blame the poor Poles.

I wouldnt view immigration to be positive because it mixes up people and cultures, that is secondary to the main difference created by immigration: economic and political one.

The fact is that workforce immigration creates dropping wages for the people on the recieving end of immigrants and it also creates rising levels of xenophobia and raises the support for far right, it make people blame other nationalities for their trouble when infact the only blame is to THE DAMNED RULING CAPITALIST ELITES !!!

[ls]

My opinion is that immigration must have a benefit for the working people of the nation that is receiving those who are immigrating.
..
I wouldnt view immigration to be positive because it mixes up people and cultures, that is secondary to the main difference created by immigration: economic and political one.

That's xenophobic wankery.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Because they're against the law I guess,

Lots of things we support here are against the law. Revolution for one. The only reason we should take any notice of laws put in place by murderous fucks like brown and jack straw is for practical reasons.

[gorillafuck]

I wouldnt view immigration to be positive because it mixes up people and cultures, that is secondary to the main difference created by immigration: economic and political one.
Are you a fascist or something?

[Pogue]

'does the fuhrer know you're here, dooooeeeeesssss tthhhheeeeeee....'

[Killfacer]

Are you a fascist or something?

The name is a dead give away.

[Lyev]

Well what the fuck is a fascist doing on my thread?

[OneNamedNameLess]

I wouldnt view immigration to be positive because it mixes up people and cultures

I wouldn't say so. Firstly, by exposing different cultures to each other I reckon a greater degree of understanding is created. Cultures can be preserved and practiced regardless of immigration or not. In addition, globalisation has resulted in very similar, city cultures anyway. And lastly, why shouldn't humans mix? Reproduction is ultimately what we are here to do. We must reproduce. I'm not saying everyone has to, but what is the deal if people from different parts of the world desire to have sex with each other?

[Pol Pot]

I wouldn't say so. Firstly, by exposing different cultures to each other I reckon a greater degree of understanding is created. Cultures can be preserved and practiced regardless of immigration or not. In addition, globalisation has resulted in very similar, city cultures anyway. And lastly, why shouldn't humans mix? Reproduction is ultimately what we are here to do. We must reproduce. I'm not saying everyone has to, but what is the deal if people from different parts of the world desire to have sex with each other?

You didnt understand what I meant. The cultural issue is all the same to me. I dont care much about culture or traditions of any nation, race or whatever so I see the point of them mixing up, staying apart or anything with them at any level. As for race, nation, religion mixing: I myself am a mix of Serbs and Croats (traditionally mortal enemies and have caused numerous ethnic cleasing of each other etc.), my cousins are muslims, and I myself respect Muslims, and I am a friend of a mullato guy who looks just like a pure black.
And what is there to understand about foreigners??? They eat and drink like me, they fuck and piss just like me, we have loads of tourists all the time and its basically the same thing are they immigrants or tourists to me.

That whole issue is beside the point for me. Immigration or no immigration WONT change a thing for me about my opinions about heritage, national pride or anything with that, that is all BS. Only culture I would like is revolutionary culture.

I intentionally tackle into controversial and sensitive things like this issue and for same reason I took this nick. It always shows who is open mided and doesnt jump to conslusions apart from those who have paranoid prejudice and expect to be surrounded with "fashs, nazi infiltrators etc" just like they think they are infiltrated by "reds, jews, blacks, zog, etc"

again: my opinion puts no value on any culture or tradition so there is no value in any culture-mixing, I think that idea is used by capitalists who are in desperate attempt to find justifications for expansion of globalisation and imperialism. "look people, capital has made it possible to get to know good foreign people, now defend capital"

just because the capitalists have made concessions to the left about gay rights and multiculturalism that doesnt mean that we should support them. Bismarck did the same in appeasing one or two demands of the left so he would stop them from achieving another, much bigger victory!

[OneNamedNameLess]

Okay I have a better understanding of what you mean now. I agree with what you are saying about immigration benefiting the far right which is my only concern about the issue. However, I don't get what you mean by the mixing cultures and people part? Are you suggesting that this combination causes xenophobia amongst the natives?

[gorillafuck]

I intentionally tackle into controversial and sensitive things like this issue and for same reason I took this nick. It always shows who is open mided and doesnt jump to conslusions apart from those who have paranoid prejudice and expect to be surrounded with "fashs, nazi infiltrators etc" just like they think they are infiltrated by "reds, jews, blacks, zog, etc"
So you were trying to weed out people who jump to conclusions by saying this....


I wouldnt view immigration to be positive because it mixes up people and cultures,
Ya, people that pointed out that that is a ridiculously xenophobic and stupid statement are just paranoid leftists

[Pol Pot]

Okay I have a better understanding of what you mean now. I agree with what you are saying about immigration benefiting the far right which is my only concern about the issue. However, I don't get what you mean by the mixing cultures and people part? Are you suggesting that this combination causes xenophobia amongst the natives?

I have studied sociology in my college and have read books about the subject both from the books written in former "communist" Yugoslavia and the modern books written from those authors more oriented towards capitalism...

The influx of large amount of immigrants causes EVERYWHERE and ALWAYS the rise of xenophobia, ethnic tension and other negative things that are typically asociated with far-right.
One of best examples is Yugoslavia which had their share of ethnic wars in two centuries before this one, and the current situation in that unpronouncable province of Chine where Uighurs live. (I am refering to latest ethnic clashes betwen Han and Uighurs)

The Fear part of xenophobia is usually about the idea that the native people will become a minority (like it has almost hapend to Uighurs), that foreigners will buy most of businesses , that foreigners will take their jobs, that their culture and language etc... that all these things will reduce their quality of life. Sociology also shows that racism is not a product of some twisted mind pathology combined with terrible parenting and other "madmen" issues but rather a product of certant political-economic situations where people are just drawn into thinking one or another thing.

Capitalists are in control of things and both far-right and far-left are marginalised and only opposition to them, however: The damn capital plays the game of divide and rule, turning right and left against each other although there is no racional benefit for either side in confronting the other. The sociological pattern of rise of far-left is usually acompanied by rise of far-right, and it goes also the other way around. The current situation in most of world is that the mainstream is not threatened either by (true) left or right, so they hardly present a challange to each other.

That is why focusing on the cultural impact of immigration is wrong. It turns attention from the real issue and that is not defending people who came but attacking the damn capital who made it so that they must go here in order to feed their children.

One of the best examples is the situation about Zimbabwese refugees to South Africa: there is violent xenophobia about those immigrants from the same people (black S. Africans) that just recently have themselves been freed from Apertheid. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8070919.stm

That is ironic, and its also sad: but almost all humans follow the same sociological patterns like ants :(
those black africans are blaming zimbabwese that they are causing the identical problems that whites in US have blamed the mexicans, the brits are blaming the eastern european people and that uighurs are blaming han chinese.

WHY: it just seems that many people behave differently when they are not at home. Since we know that from our own example so then we are even more so afraid of foreigners that just might be even worse (oh no!) than we are... and than that fear just spreads like wildfire and on the first incident it turns into hate.

That is why immigration will always be bad good for capital (cheap workforce) and good for far right (more hate). I repeat that I dont have anything against foreign people but these are historic facts which nothing can disprove: uncontroled immigration is not good.

(although I would allways welcome some nice african azz all sweatty and wet and wild from those war ravaged africa that seeks shelter and other MANLY shit I can offer her) ;)


So you were trying to weed out people who jump to conclusions by saying this....
-that is completly right purge purge!

[Lyev]

That is why immigration will always be bad good for capital (cheap workforce) and good for far right (more hate). I repeat that I dont have anything against foreign people but these are historic facts which nothing can disprove: uncontroled immigration is not good.


I understand where you're coming from Pol Pot, but when you say it's good for capitalism because it's a cheap workforce can't capitalism just get a cheap workforce from their natives? and you think that uncontrolled immigration spreads hate, but where else are refugees going to go?

From your perspective it seems like a lose-lose situation for some people who either stay in their native country and get engulfed by war or poverty or they immigrate to a different country and "help spread hate".

In 2006 in the UK Somalians were amongst the greatest amount of people to be granted citizenship and think about what has being going on there for the past 20 odd years. It seems it's slightly ironic in that you say this
(I am refering to latest ethnic clashes betwen Han and Uighurs) is caused by immigration but sometimes people, like Somalians, are fleeing from war. So they're fleeing from a civil war just to create hate and tension somewhere else. Do you get my drift?

[scarletghoul]

I agree with most of AGW's post except for this

but when you say it's good for capitalism because it's a cheap workforce can't capitalism just get a cheap workforce from their natives?The native workers of first world countries usually have more rights due to the accumulated fruits of the labour struggle. Foreign workers from poorer countries are easier to exploit, often being paid below minimum wage and working for longer hours. They also dont have any significant political representation, unlike native workers who have trade unions and more access to legal action. So its the same reason companies ship the worst jobs abroad to china and stuff, because the labour is cheaper and more exploitable. The same is true of the foreign workers that come to this country.
Of course, this can give the native workers the impression that the foreigners are "stealing our jobs", and divides the workers fostering racism and xenophobia.

[Lyev]

the labour is cheaper and more exploitable.

Oh right thanks, so is this why corporations have most of their sweatshops and factories and whatnot abroad? Because it's easier to exploit foreign workers, and therefore cheaper?

[Pol Pot]

I understand where you're coming from Pol Pot, but when you say it's good for capitalism because it's a cheap workforce can't capitalism just get a cheap workforce from their natives? and you think that uncontrolled immigration spreads hate, but where else are refugees going to go?

From your perspective it seems like a lose-lose situation for some people who either stay in their native country and get engulfed by war or poverty or they immigrate to a different country and "help spread hate".

In 2006 in the UK Somalians were amongst the greatest amount of people to be granted citizenship and think about what has being going on there for the past 20 odd years. It seems it's slightly ironic in that you say this is caused by immigration but sometimes people, like Somalians, are fleeing from war. So they're fleeing from a civil war just to create hate and tension somewhere else. Do you get my drift?

- No they cannot, unions protect them, individual people just wont work those jobs or not for such a low pay. I know it on my own example. I have an offer to work night shift in a village 1.5 hours ride from my city doing physical work but I just wont do it. its a pain in the azz. However Bosnians who are from poor neighbouring Bosnia they are ready, willing and able, after 30 of them were employed 3 yeara ago, I was asking around about getting that job for a friend of mine, and it seems that the wage has droped substantialy because immigrants have droped the price down. It seems that none of you people understand the principle od market competition (of workforce) that drives down the price for the service (work).
Now that the recession has kicked in, more native people are seeking those jobs and they are blaming Bosnians for taking jobs from them and making wages so miserably low. 100% STANDARD SCENARIO !!!

-native peopl just dont care about the refugees. When people kill each other because of pizza then I dont have to explain this one.

-prime example is russia. In USSR there were restristions in uncontroled migrations. and the status of workers was protected and more-less eqal on federation level. Nowadays immigration is rampant, wages are not equal, and why should they be, its better for capital if Uzbeki accepts to work for longer hours and less pay... People are in THE SAME xenophobia rising situation and they just HATE foreigners. Russia has become a heaven with best organised far right parties, milititas and underground independent cells. These refugees leave war and come to war. And russians couldnt care less about just why are they comming.

-and about running away from hate creates more hate: YES, that is the basic theory that no energy can dissapear or appear, it can just be transformed from one place to another and from one form to another.

I know this is ultra un-utopistic and un-idelaistic but it is just how things are.

No those xenophobs aint mentaly disabeled they are just like ants following sociological patterns. "But refugees need help?!" well nobody cares!

-dark reality

[Lyev]

I understand what you're saying Pol Pot and you make the situation seem rather hopeless, but what the fuck is this?-

"But refugees need help?!" well nobody cares!
In the words of Martin Luther King "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."

[Pol Pot]

I understand what you're saying Pol Pot and you make the situation seem rather hopeless, but what the fuck is this?-

In the words of Martin Luther King "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."

Its obvious what it means. The universal sociological pattern of xenophobia rising with immigration shows without doubt that people just dont care why are those newcomers in their land... My people didt care why serbs were here, uighurs dot care why han chinese are there, russians dont care why uzbekis are there, south africans dont care why zimbabweans are there!

us few that do care dont matter cuz nobody listens to us. and the saddest thing is that sociology and economics show that those people who dont care agout them are more rational than we are because being "humane" is not pure logic, but rather empathy and compassion.

People lack compassion but have tons of hate. that is what "nobody cares means"

Comerade I hope you understand me :cool:

[Lyev]

Sorry, I didn't read it properly, took it the wrong way, I understand you now. :)

You seem to be able to find an awful lot of negativity on this subject, is there any solution for everyone involved?

[Pol Pot]

Sorry, I didn't read it properly, took it the wrong way, I understand you now. :)

You seem to be able to find an awful lot of negativity on this subject, is there any solution for everyone involved?

Well then, I am glad I put effort into explaining things :thumbup1:

There are several option for solving this although none of them will be "great" considering both moral aspect and the social-economic one...

There are no ideal options, but there are those options that can surely improve this problem.
-for workforce migrants: a strong international labor union that will protect and unite them even abroad, or on country level: a law that makes it impossible to exploit "imported" workforce, problem cannot be fully settled because it would demand removing the cause of problem: capitalism
-for those fleeing war or disasters: their problems are bigger because people in africa and most of asia have pretty good reasons to get away from where they are.
Solution would be for countries with risk of displaced people in high numbers should allocate a part of their land just for these emergency cases, those parts should have infrastructure and basic requirements of human beings until their status is resolved in an acceptable way and they dont have to be sent to Russia just to be killed by skins or die in a boat to Spain or be crippled by xenophobic masses in S.Africa.

I would also support the idea of international reward for any country that is willing to allocate a large piece of its land (some big country like Canada) for exactly those emergency situations.

But to prevent refugees actually becoming refugees you would have to help them avoid those troubles that make them flee: usually stuff in the end caused by capitalism and disputes over material goods and overpopulation.

[scarletghoul]

-for workforce migrants: A strong international labor union that will protect and unite them even abroad
iww?

[scarletghoul]

Solution would be for countries with risk of displaced people in high numbers should allocate a part of their land just for these emergency cases
This would probably result in ghettoisation of the immigrant populations which wouldnt be that great

[Pol Pot]

This would probably result in ghettoisation of the immigrant populations which wouldnt be that great

Nope that is just the thing we are trying to avoid with this: when these people flee war they come in large numbers and since the nation they are arriving to doesnt have anything ready for them, that causes them to be in make-shift ghettos where they live in horrible conditions and have to resort to crime and other things that result in rising xenophobia.

I am trying to suggest that there are already prepared accomodations for emergency situations so that they have at least those basic things humans need which they would have difficulty getting in current situations. When people send aid it ends up abused by private aid-distribution firms and their private owners for accumulating personal wealth.

Athough if you have some other, maybe better idea I would gladly welcome it :)

[communard resolution]

That's xenophobic wankery.

Why, wasn't that the implicit No2EU line a couple of months back? A lot of people on revleft supported them.

[scarletghoul]

No, the No2EU line was against the EU not because of immigration and mixing of cultures, but because it is a bourgeois unioin working in the interests of European corporations and helping the exploitation of european workers etc

[ls]

Why, wasn't that the implicit No2EU line a couple of months back? A lot of people on revleft supported them.

Aren't you a SP member?

Hmm........

[communard resolution]

No, the No2EU line was against the EU not because of immigration and mixing of cultures, but because it is a bourgeois unioin working in the interests of European corporations and helping the exploitation of european workers etc

Maybe this statement of Pol Pot's reminded me of No2EU:


That means that immigration for the sake of capitalists who only want cheaper workforce is not the right reason for this. I am against disciminating them, but the FACT is that they are cheaper to hire than brits for the same jobs. Those people are not guilty for the injustices that capitalism creates. And elites avoid the blame so people blame the poor Poles.

[communard resolution]

Aren't you a SP member?

Hmm........

I'm not, nor have I ever been. You must be confusing me with someone else.

EDIT: I think I suggested to vote SPGB, if anything, in a No2EU thread - not the same as SP. SPGB are an old propagandist group who declared they would use the elections to be able to talk about socialism on radio and in papers for a few minutes. Which isn't much, but at that point this seemed more feasible to me than to vote for a crypto-nationalist outfit.