Results 1 to 20 of 120
Is it wrong to oppose mass immigration?
With the economic turnoil the West is going through at the moment should we be more concerned about the instability and cost associated with mass immigration? For example in the UK unemployment is over 8%, our welfare bill is currently around £200bn and the recent GDP stats have confirmed that we're entered a double dip recession. As it's easy to turn migrants into scapegoats for poor economic performance is it fairer on all concerned to drastically reduce the influx so we can concentrate on getting the economy right? To that end I support UKIP's proposal - a non racist freedom loving party - of a five year freeze on immigration so we can assimilate those who arrived under New Labour and deal with the million or so who who have entered illegally these past few years.
Last edited by chefdave; 27th April 2012 at 08:20.
I take your point, it's something that I've struggled with before. Personally, I cannot help but feel that introducing strict quotas and reductions could mean people who urgently need asylum and help and can't get it.
I'm no economist, so I can only look on this from a naiive humanitarian point of view, and I hate to see the Right, especially the fascists, made to look like they've got the right idea.
Last edited by Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant'; 27th April 2012 at 08:35.
There are some on the left that are anti-mass immigration within capitalist society, not many though and are generally looked down upon on the board.
I think people should have a right to live and work anywhere they want.
That's pretty much antithetical to our agenda so no.
Mass immigration is pretty much a myth anyway - you sound like an EDLer there. The problems and proposed solutions work with the logic of the capitalist framework, it makes no sense for the Left to succumb to that; our job is to transcend it.
Maybe we ougtha start expropriations, oh look easy fix to poverty right there!
Why would anyone be looked down upon for wanting to preserve their own culture and ensuring that their economy remains relatively efficient? Generally mass immigration flows just one way: from poorer African/middle eastern/Asian countries to the richer west, so while it's in the interests of inhabitents from those regions to have loose borders and relaxed immigration controls the West doesn't really gain from it. Other than the sense of moral superiority we enjoy from housing poor immigrants mass immigration into UK is a negative sum game, one we can ill afford.
I want to come and live in your house. Is that ok?
...why are you on a left-wing forum?What do you gain by holding the right-wingers point of view and posting about it in a venue where almost everyone will disagree?
Mass immigration isn't a myth, since 1997 we've allowed 5.2 million foreign immigrants into the country and the new coalition government havn't exactly put in the sort of controls many of us hoped for, in 2010 net immigration was still 250,000. Very few people want this level of immigration, nobody was asked to vote on it, so altering the funadamental makeup of UK like this without any mandate from the electorate is a subversion of the 'democratic' process.
It's pretty much reactionary to oppose immigration. The land doesn't really belong to anyone except the proletariat as a class, in the view of communists. To oppose immigration is just pointless nationalism.
Why did the Victorian missionaries head out to Africa? No point in preaching to the converted....why are you on a left-wing forum?
What happens if the proletariat class decide they want to keep the land in their own hands and prevent a foreign capitalist class from entering and watering down their communist culture? If the proletariat do genuinely own the land they get the final say over who's allowed to use it.
..I seeWhy did the Victorian missionaries head out to Africa? No point in preaching to the converted.
"so altering the funadamental makeup of UK like this without any mandate.."
Fundamental makeup? OH you mean the white faces and English / Welsh / other gaelic languages. Good point, don't want to fuck up our flawless society that has no roots stemming from historical immigration.
I know I'm being a bit childish here but that nationalist attitude really fucking annoys me
There would be no foreign capital class. They'd all be either dead or dispossessed of their riches and integrated into the working class.
Imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever, saying:
"I KNOW YOU FEEL UPSET RE STAMPING, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM STRUCTURAL OPPRESSION"
Are you actually a child or did you intentionally ignore the obvious dissimilarities in the scenarios you just juxtaposed?
the point is to eliminate the ruling class, not simply to keep them at bay.
"I'm anti-Republican and Democratic / if they self destruct that's anti-climactic"
The other poster said, and I quote: "I think people should have a right to live anywhere they want". If people have a RIGHT to live ANYWHERE they want it stands to reason that you don't have the moral authority prevent me from from living in your house if I want to.
Do you not understand context or do you take everything this literally, just to be an asswipe?
I thought of chefdave yesterday because Diane Abbott and a certain Mr Farage were on Question Time. It was quite funny because matey said a load of stuff about immigrants coming over and straight away stealing all the social housing and benefits without ever contributing anything, and then some guy who worked at the housing authority pointed out that actually he was lying and these immigrants weren't entitled to social housing at all and he'd just made stuff up to scare people and try to cover himself. As if often the case amongst anti-immigration types, always making up semi-sophisticated arguments about the economy and housing and all that jazz, in a vain attempt to cover up the fact that they actually oppose immigration because they don't want to have to be around foreigners...
Ah, that's ok then. The humanitarian option is not to assert ownership rights over certain patches of the earth so each and every community has security of tenure, but to elimate all opposition so conflict and the capitalist mode of production can never again blight humanity.
I'm glad we've cleared that one up.
