Fascism: Get with the latest fad!

[Ryoma]

Lots of sense talked on this thread.

Now that the alliance between Labour and the Conservatives is quite a bit more obvious, they need a new potential opposition to demonise.

It's hardly surprising that people turn to the BNP when the left has offered no credible alternative, and has generally thought that being anti-immigration is the same as being racist.

Loads of ordinary people are against further immigration without being racist, and for perfectly sound reasons, - lots of ethnic minorities aren't in favour of allowing further immigration for just the same reasons.

The left, unfortunately are a bunch of posturing idiots, who have no respect for the views of their natural constituency, and have left it to the bnp whose core motivation is almost certainly racist.

Bollocks; It's so wrong.(this whole political situation) Fela's post sounds about right, much the same as the guys I met in the Trimdons who told me they were considering voting BNP.

I remember saying in one of my earliest posts on Urban75 that if the left wanted to get any where politically, they would have to pander to some extent to the anti-immigration feeling of a great many ordinary people without much money, and being told, that if I thought being anti-immigration could be any part of a leftist platform, no-one on the left would want to have anything to do with me.

Great result.

The reason that many on the Left are opposed to Immigration controls is that these Controls basically state that the presence of Immigrants is the problem - that Immigrants, and not Capitalist system, are the problem.

the Capitalist state rations welfare and forces those at the bottom - newly arrived Immigrant communities and the white working classes - to compete for welfare and resources. These breeds resentment and even hatred amoung large parts of the host community. the State plays one group against the other. Socialists and Progressives would say that Britain is an extremely wealthy country which spends tens of billions on weapons and that a decent living is possible for all.

It's not surprising that those on the Left would want nothing to do with anti-Immigration. Such a stance is opposed to the very basics of Socialism and progrssive politics. Ask yourself why Russian Billionaires and Arab Oil Sheikhs are not subject to Immigration controls although lower class Russians and Arabs are. The rich can travel around the world and reside in most countries without restrictions.

We are entering a period of intense reaction in this country. Socialism seems as far away as it ever has and Facism is on the march. Many on the Left are either give up or mould their arguements to fit in with teh right wing tide. The true test is to keep true to your principles in this era.

 

[Ryoma]

I remember saying in one of my earliest posts on Urban75 that if the left wanted to get any where politically, they would have to pander to some extent to the anti-immigration feeling of a great many ordinary people without much money

Surely these people will prefer a Party like The BNP over an anti-immigrant "Left" Party.

The only sensible thing that Jean-Marie Le Pen ever said was when he was asked if he feared the French Tory Party odopting his policies. He answered,

"People will always prefer the Original to the copy"

 

[ZWord]

The reason that many on the Left are opposed to Immigration controls is that these Controls basically state that the presence of Immigrants is the problem - that Immigrants, and not Capitalist system, are the problem.

the Capitalist state rations welfare and forces those at the bottom - newly arrived Immigrant communities and the white working classes - to compete for welfare and resources. These breeds resentment and even hatred amoung large parts of the host community. the State plays one group against the other. Socialists and Progressives would say that Britain is an extremely wealthy country which spends tens of billions on weapons and that a decent living is possible for all.

It's not surprising that those on the Left would want nothing to do with anti-Immigration. Such a stance is opposed to the very basics of Socialism and progrssive politics. Ask yourself why Russian Billionaires and Arab Oil Sheikhs are not subject to Immigration controls although lower class Russians and Arabs are. The rich can travel around the world and reside in most countries without restrictions.

We are entering a period of intense reaction in this country. Socialism seems as far away as it ever has and Facism is on the march. Many on the Left are either give up or mould their arguements to fit in with teh right wing tide. The true test is to keep true to your principles in this era.

The problem is that the left are trying to be too good.

Sure, in an ideal world, we wouldn't have immigration controls, and actually immigration controls are very unfair. But, unfortunately, at the moment, politically, the world is divided into countries. It seems to me that this means that if you have the political aim of trying to be in power in order to govern in a way that benefits people, then you have to limit those people, to the people of your country, and you can't include the whole world in it, because otherwise the help you're trying to offer to the people of your country, will not be any help to them.

Basically it seems to me, that if what you said is a fair representation of most leftist views, then the left are being "right" at the price of having any real political clout, and as far as politics is concerned, I wonder what the point is in being right, if you can't do anything with it.

 

[JimPage]

The only positive thing about a rise of the BNP is that it may spur the Left to get their shit together and combat them. Increased polarisation in society should be welcomed by all progressives.

bnp votes have been on the up since 2000, and each increase in their support has been met with a flat denial that those increases have happened

what will change if they double their councillors on thursday?

 

[treelover]

I think the no borders movement may be disasterous for the left, just as imo, was CND in the 80's, allowing us to be seen as marginal, out of touch, not understanding public concerns and ideoligically fanatical. I also think it will harm genuine asylum seekers chances(as some workers in the field have informed me) and will ultimately give a boost to the far right.

I also wonder when the left will put/give as much energy, passion,etc into defending welfare and fighting on poverty issues among the uk population, black andf white, etc. By self-righteously attacking the bnp, the symptom, but not tackling the causes of thier revival, they are creating major problems for the future.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

bnp votes have been on the up since 2000, and each increase in their support has been met with a flat denial that those increases have happened

what will change if they double their councillors on thursday?

Exactly it's no point in the left burying their heads in the sand and shouting over and over again 'there is no need to worry about immigration la la la can't hear you' the only winners from that tactic are the bnp scum.

If a left party said 'yes there is a problem and it needs to be dealt with firmly humanely and fairly' then the left could start to win back the lost working classes.

The way some left parties behave re the issue of immigration, asylum and the allocation of resources remind me of a pregnant teenager who believes that the foetus will go away if she denies tht it is there until she is presented with reality in the form of a baby - unfortunately if the left continue to deny that people have genuine worries then the political baby born will be a monster which may not be able to be controlled.

Don't forget in the UK we have been here before with bloody riots against the Hugenots and anti catholic mobs rampaging through London. This isnot something I want to see repeated today.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

I think the no borders movement may be disasterous for the left, just as imo, was CND in the 80's, allowing us to be seen as marginal, out of touch, not understanding public concerns and ideoligically fanatical. I also think it will harm genuine asylum seekers chances(as some workers in the field have informed me) and will ultimately give a boost to the far right.

I don't think the CND issue was as disasterous as the bonkers No Borders twats are. CND at least had a political logic about it which No Borders doesn't.

I also wonder when the left will put/give as much energy, passion,etc into defending welfare and fighting on poverty issues among the uk population, black andf white, etc. By self-righteously attacking the bnp, the symptom, but not tackling the causes of thier revival, they are creating major problems for the future.

Word!

 

[treelover]

OH, i think NB has a well defined political and idelogically framework, I would say it's basically if capital and goods can move freely across the world, then people should be able to, they want to show the contradictions in the neo-liberal ideloogy.Though i am sure they do care about refugees/migrants, but they do seem to have a hierachy of oppression

 

[tollbar]

I also wonder when the left will put/give as much energy, passion,etc into defending welfare and fighting on poverty issues among the uk population, black andf white, etc. By self-righteously attacking the bnp, the symptom, but not tackling the causes of thier revival, they are creating major problems for the future.

Some on the left have been raising these points as long back as when the BNP started gaining seats in 2002. Unfortunately, the SWP wishing to cover the backs of their erstwhile allies on the labour left over labours manifest failures in local government and their desire to promote the fundamentally corrupt multicultural agenda that sees shrinking resources being parcelled out on communitarian and sectarian lines (and some suspect on the basis of the reliability of the recipiants as voting fodder) rather then on a class basis, have been prepared to go along with the line that any BNP gains are minimal and the BNP can be defeated in the future by constructing cross class alliances and using any failure by the BNP to make significant major breakthroughs as evidence of the correctness of that position.

Even if the BNP gain another 20+ seats as seems possible we will still be told that they have only a tiny minority of council seats and can be ignored beyond repeating the usual anti nazi rhetoric at election time. If Respect gain seats, as is likely, due to the likliehood that such seats are almost certain to be in areas where there is no direct competition with the BNP I doubt that anything much will change.

The real wake up call will come on the day when there is a parliamentary by-election in a seat where the BNP win. Sadly, I suspect, the day when this becomes a strong possibility is now nearly inevitable.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

OH, i think NB has a well defined political and idelogically framework, I would say it's basically if capital and goods can move freely across the world, then people should be able to, they want to show the contradictions in the neo-liberal ideloogy.Though i am sure they do care about refugees/migrants, but they do seem to have a hierachy of oppression

Absolutely. NB represents idealism, but there's no coherent reason it shouldnt be achievable.
Surely its as much a capitalist idea that people have freedom to go where they want.

 

[JimPage]

Some on the left have been raising these points as long back as when the BNP started gaining seats in 2002.

...and from some quarters when they started polling 10% of the vote
, whcih was from 2000. no one can say they were nto warned about what is going to happen today


Even if the BNP gain another 20+ seats as seems possible we will still be told that they have only a tiny minority of council seats and can be ignored beyond repeating the usual anti nazi rhetoric at election time.

.... the headlines are already prepared- if the bnp get 50 councillors in this time, it will be a defeat because the swp and searchlight say they expected 51. this was exactly the response after the general election results- the best ever for a fascist party in the uk

The real wake up call will come on the day when there is a parliamentary by-election in a seat where the BNP win. Sadly, I suspect, the day when this becomes a strong possibility is now nearly inevitable.

..... i dont think anything short of griffin at number 10 will shake mainstream antifascism from its slumber

 

[JimPage]

I think the no borders movement may be disasterous for the left, .

i disagree. the left in scotland have argued antiracism for open borders and internationalist perspective- and the mood up here is different. there is nothing wrong, per se, in arguing open borders, as long as it is done person to person when you are canvassing them, and not from behind a microphone screeching slogans at people

 

[bluestreak]

i'm sure everyone else has said it but it's scare stories....

telling everyone that if they don't vote labour nazis will get in. that's always been the rallying cry of bad government.

 

[ZWord]

Sounds about right bluestreak.

OH, i think NB has a well defined political and idelogically framework, I would say it's basically if capital and goods can move freely across the world, then people should be able to, they want to show the contradictions in the neo-liberal ideloogy.Though i am sure they do care about refugees/migrants, but they do seem to have a hierachy of oppression

FFS, first the radical left needs to take power in one single country, and then show how good it's possible to make a country to live in for the people of that country if it's governed for the people's benefit: then you hope that other countries might follow suit, and then you should start thinking about the ideal of no borders, which is a great ideal, definitely, but not one you can make a starting point if you want to gain political power.

I almost forgot, great xenophobic policy for an imaginary credible party of the radical left to adopt, if anyone ever forms one... Stop people and businesses that aren't resident in the UK from owning property in the UK, - make them sell up by a certain date, or face compulsory purchase at a massive discount by the government.

 

[TonkaToy]

I almost forgot, great xenophobic policy for an imaginary credible party of the radical left to adopt, if anyone ever forms one... Stop people and businesses that aren't resident in the UK from owning property in the UK, - make them sell up by a certain date, or face compulsory purchase at a massive discount by the government.

Erh? Are you serious with that? That would stop inward investment very quickly.

 

[tollbar]

i disagree. the left in scotland have argued antiracism for open borders and internationalist perspective- and the mood up here is different. there is nothing wrong, per se, in arguing open borders, as long as it is done person to person when you are canvassing them, and not from behind a microphone screeching slogans at people

A very good point, although it can be overstated. There have been some very serious campaigns such as that over the Vucaj family deportations, largely led by working class women and kids from the Glasgow schemes (housing estates for those in Ingerland) which have put the labour led scottish executive under a great deal of pressure and have had very sympathetic treatment in the press. If you can relate the arguements over immigration, asylum, borders and resources to people who are someones friends or neighbours it has more effect then screaming racist at people down a megaphone. To their credit, a lot of the supporters of the SWP in Glasgow seem to have taken that on board.

 

[ZWord]

Erh? Are you serious with that? That would stop inward investment very quickly.

Good thing too. Because what inward investment means is that foreign individuals corporations and banks, own your countries' industries and residential property, and that the ordinary people have to work for them, to make them a profit, don't see any of it, and on top of that, have to pay them rent.

 

[JimPage]

..... i dont think anything short of griffin at number 10 will shake mainstream antifascism from its slumber

ans as expected, a doubling of fash canddiates has been met with responses from the SWP and Searhclight, that, actually, the BNP didnt do that well after all

 

[audiotech]

ans as expected, a doubling of fash canddiates has been met with responses from the SWP and Searhclight, that, actually, the BNP didnt do that well after all

Considering the Clarke debacle, Prescott, Jowell and a perception of sleaze, Hodge's comments, total disaffection with Blair's government, disenfranchisement of significant numbers of voters and years of media hysteria on asylum and immigration, I would have thought that the BNP would have by now at least one MP, a Euro representative and considerably more councillors than they have at present. The more intelligent of the BNP leadership will be thinking this too.

 

[JimPage]

A very good point, although it can be overstated. There have been some very serious campaigns such as that over the Vucaj family deportations, largely led by working class women and kids from the Glasgow schemes (housing estates for those in Ingerland) which have put the labour led scottish executive under a great deal of pressure and have had very sympathetic treatment in the press. If you can relate the arguements over immigration, asylum, borders and resources to people who are someones friends or neighbours it has more effect then screaming racist at people down a megaphone. To their credit, a lot of the supporters of the SWP in Glasgow seem to have taken that on board.

i dunno- i think no borders in scotalnd is widespread and genuine- and not only the preserve of middle class types who like the idea in theory. i would go so far as to say the arguements for open borders has been won in- but ordianry working class people who have more affinity with workers of other countries - the way it should be

 

[Ryoma]

The problem is that the left are trying to be too good.

Sure, in an ideal world, we wouldn't have immigration controls, and actually immigration controls are very unfair. But, unfortunately, at the moment, politically, the world is divided into countries. It seems to me that this means that if you have the political aim of trying to be in power in order to govern in a way that benefits people, then you have to limit those people, to the people of your country, and you can't include the whole world in it, because otherwise the help you're trying to offer to the people of your country, will not be any help to them.

Basically it seems to me, that if what you said is a fair representation of most leftist views, then the left are being "right" at the price of having any real political clout, and as far as politics is concerned, I wonder what the point is in being right, if you can't do anything with it.

I am not stating that the Left should campaign for no immigration controls (in this period you would not carry many people) however the Left should not campaign for them! Such a view would run totally counter to everything Socialists believe in and would certainly amount to pandering to the Right. The Left can never complete with the BNP on the race and immigration issue and how could it ever. Being anti-fascist and anti-racist means opposing those ideologies and what they believe. I think that the Left should state that Immigration is not a problem in itself and a positive thing overall. It means making basic socialist arguments and questioning the whole economic set-up.

I would be interested to read a Left/Progressive defence of immigration controls? The ones put forward by the SWP at a recent RESPECT conference i.e. many Blacks support Immigration controls, seemed perverse to me.

 

[dennisr]

I would be interested to read a Left/Progressive defence of immigration controls?

i would agree that such an argument is foolish.

I don't think lefts should or would argue in defence of immigration controls though. As you said earlier there are certain circumstances were raising opposition to all controls would have to be very carefully worded. And to push crudely and abstractly for 'no controls' as some sort of main slogan would result in not even being able to get the ear of those the left has to convince of its wider arguments if we are ever going to get beyond shouting in a vaccum.

I have heard some on the left berate others for not being 'revolutionary' enough in opposing such controls - ie raising opposition as the key issue. The problem is, in the present climate, thier 'purity' may make them feel happy about themselves - i dosent get the rest of us one step further towards a society were such contols are not - falsely - percieved as a 'necessity' and it does not help the victims of such controls one bit in practice.

For me HOW immigration controls are opposed, HOW they a fought, HOW and WHEN the slogans are raised in opposition and HOW these ideas are articulated at any particuler moment is simply a tactical question not a central principle. And neither a principle or a tactic can ever depend on a daft arguement like 'well even some of the victims support them' - for instance.

 

[ZWord]

I am not stating that the Left should campaign for no immigration controls (in this period you would not carry many people) however the Left should not campaign for them! Such a view would run totally counter to everything Socialists believe in and would certainly amount to pandering to the Right. The Left can never complete with the BNP on the race and immigration issue and how could it ever. Being anti-fascist and anti-racist means opposing those ideologies and what they believe. I think that the Left should state that Immigration is not a problem in itself and a positive thing overall. It means making basic socialist arguments and questioning the whole economic set-up.

I would be interested to read a Left/Progressive defence of immigration controls? The ones put forward by the SWP at a recent RESPECT conference i.e. many Blacks support Immigration controls, seemed perverse to me.

The bones of a leftist defence of immigration controls is in the post above that you quoted. The whole point of being "a leftist" is to try to use the political system, to benefit people first, rather than the economy first, and people second. Given that you're limited to trying to gain power in one country, if you then try to have no immigration controls, then the help you offer, won't be much help, because you can't afford to offer it to the whole world. If you want to make a country that's good for people to live in, you have to find a way to discriminate between who is part of that country and who isn't. Though obviously there's no reason why race should have anything to do with who gets citizenship. It's odd that you say, you'd be interested tor read a defence... without apparently looking at or dealing with what I said in the post you quoted.