9/10 times this exactly it. Testosterone is often the biggest factor.
Immigration and political correctness/"preferential treatment"
- Thread starter frogwoman
- Start date
9/10 times this exactly it. Testosterone is often the biggest factor.
Anybody who uses that silly term "pulling the ladder up" needs to look at their own ignorance and bigotry before having a go at others.
It is easy for middle class liberals to preach the benefits of migration. They are the most likely to benefit and least likely to lose by migration.
The issue of Class can not be divorced from the migration issue.
Economic migration suits the interest of the ruling class not the working class.
It means poorer nations lose the skilled workers they most need.It means an ever greater concentration of wealth in fewer areas and fewer hands.
I think been oposed to immigration and racism are two completely different matters and the two shouldn't be confused or intertwined.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
Well the tendancy of longer standing communities of immigrant origin to be opposed to new groups coming in is well documented and its based on the idea that it will make it harder for them.
Migration in the areas where Im working (and live) has - by and large - been beneficial. The problems arise from a lack of will/lack of care by government and local authorities to work with existing communities to ensure that the problems - and fears - created by changing demographics are smoothed over.
Most of the loudest objections to immigration come from people who live in areas with barely any immigrants. IME The hostiliy to immigration and immigrants is overwhlemingly based on fear, ignorence and good old racism.
kaka. You seem to believe that people from migrant communities are less able to understand the issue than you are. You also seem to believe that other people in areas with barely any immigrants are also less able than you to understand the issue.
Perhaps your right? And perhaps your also right that migration has been by and large beneficial.
Myself i think your wrong.
I think that you are in danger of learning very little from your experiences because of what seems like a very fixed view.
And what exactly is that view based on?
Yes there are some loud racist voices against immigration. Does that mean you should only listen to those views?
I would argue that there are some even louder racist voices in favour of immigration.
I would argue that if you want a world of less inequality and less racism you need to control the movement of capital and labour.
Economic migration hits poorer countries really hard and also increases competition for jobs and housing in poorer communities in the richer countries.
Perhaps thats why so many Black and Asian people would be so firmly opposed to your views?
On the question of racism do you think that some of your underlying assumptions could be seen as racist?
In the news today, it is reporting that 10% of young people age 16-18 are not in employment, education, or training, (NEETS) that is an incredible and shaming figure and why some of it must be down to the recession, surely the fact these are one of the parts of the workforce, low paid service sector, etc, where competition is so pronounced from migrant workers has some bearing.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
some people within settled migrant communities are agaisnt further immigration and immigrants. Its is notable becasue only in that it seems suprising to some people that should be the case.
Immigraiton is problematic. However Im very much of the opinion that the fears around immigration and imigrants are massively exagerated and fueled by ignorance, scare mongering, xenophobia and racism.
And IME, the greatest degree of these factors are eveident in all white communities with very little history of immigration. If you look at the where the votes for the BNP is highest they tend to be average income, overwhelmingly white areas which are nearby areas with a high immigrant population. So you have people who maybe see lots of people from different backgrounds but rarely - if ever - interact with them.
In areas where the population is more mixed their is - by and large - far greater tolerance and interaction between different groups.
Well Ive lived in inner ciry leeds for 20 years. Apart from that most of our large cities were built by immigration over the past 200 - different waves of migration have come in, beringing ideas and skills and energy - In Leed their have been teh Irish, East european jews, chinese, people from the caribeean, then from south asia, then Iran and now kurds, poles and people from west and southern african coutries.
In each case there were problems and racism and resentments and adjustments and interactions and acceptance and the city contiuned to evolve and grow. The more recent waves of migration are part of an ongoing parttern.
More personally Ive known several areas - including the one I live in - expericen quite marked demographic changes over the past ten years as significant numbers of peope from refugee backgounds have moved in. This has energised the areas - they have gone from being crime blighted shit holes to places where crime has gone down and you have a far more motivated, younger and highly skilled population. Yes they're are still problems - these are large areas of social housing with all that entails, and some of the indigenous population dont like it but most people will tell you that the area has markedly improved.
Another example - Bradford has seen a large influx of refugees - particualrly kurds and afghans over the past ten years. Until then the city has been pretty much segreagated between the pakisani and white english popualtions. The arrival of new, more varied communities is starting to break up those ingrained power structures within the mosques, communtiy organsations and local politics.
Who are the voices in favour of immmigration and how are they 'racist'?
And why do you think so many black and asian people would be opposed to my views?
Yes there is an issue of changing demographics and its impact on resources in poorer areas. There is an argument about employers shipping in cheap labour and the draining of skills away from developing countries. And whilst such global inequlaities exist you cant have umlimited immigraiton without is casuing major problems. But slamming the door shut would cause massive problems as well.
But we dont have 'unlimited immigration' - and many people who came to this coutnry to work over the past 10 years are returning home now that the work is drying up.
As I said immigration is problematic - but what I dont accept are the arguments about security, crime and culture being adversly affeected by immigraiton and feel strongly that much of the debate is xenpphobia and racism dressed up as pragmatic concerns. The far more serious problems in this coutnry stem from us bring arse fucked by neo-liberal economics for the past 25 years whcih has creatd gross inequality in order to massively enrich a tiny minority. Migrant workers delivering pizza for £2.50 per hour are as much a victim of that as the rest of us.
It answers the "preferential treatment" question this thread is about, the roots of it. The council authority within Birmingham recognises community "leaders" from various ethnic groups. Resources are allocated to those groups by the council in form of community centres and other representative facilities. South Asians running businesses in the area is just "proof" that feeds the idea of one group receiving preferential treatment.
There are no white community leaders and nor should there be but it provides a convenient niche for the BNP to fill and they can point at the representation other ethnic groups and claim "whites abandoned". Griffin does this with consistent regularity when asked about the whites only membership policy being racist asking "do you accuse the black police officers association of racism?".
The tension, as Butchers posted 2 pages ago is over resources. The problem is a social problem. The symptoms of that problem in the day to day lives of people - lack of social housing, state of services etc. etc. etc. are class based problems. The addition of race is entirely artificial.
glenquagmire
Rightwing NuLab apologist
Why can't you stop going on about 'the left' as if everyone on 'the left' had the same opinions?
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
I'd pretty much agree with that - esp that the problem is resources.
I'd also argue that the way to tackle it that, rather than different working class communities competing with each other for the resources, we all make common casue in order to fight for a better deal for everyone.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
There was a great piece by kenan Malik in Catalyst, the old mag of the now gone CRE, that brought out the class aspect of this brilliantly and demonstrated that the approach taken by the local authorities, an intervention based on a top-down multi-cultural appoach set the different sectors of the community at each others throat. Give us a sec and i'll see if i can find it. Here we go
likesfish
You can't park here sir
Brighton Council is quite good at stirring up problems in a ham fisted way.
an Indian family tried to move into a property at the other end of the road but left pretty quickly because there neighbors are scum
they'd given the family there before no end of trouble so not really racist just anti social gits.
rather than dealing with the problem send the entire road threatening letters
seems you have a problem you have to leap through rings to get it sorted.
shout racism or homophobia go to the front of the queue.
its a ham fisted way making Racism so evil that almost any other crime is seem not as bad as being racist.
an Indian family tried to move into a property at the other end of the road but left pretty quickly because there neighbors are scum
they'd given the family there before no end of trouble so not really racist just anti social gits.rather than dealing with the problem send the entire road threatening letters
seems you have a problem you have to leap through rings to get it sorted.
shout racism or homophobia go to the front of the queue.
its a ham fisted way making Racism so evil that almost any other crime is seem not as bad as being racist.
Spot on, it's what anti-fascism should look like now.
ericjarvis
give a feck for the feckless
I always come back to the same basic point. To find your enemy look at the money and the power. The money and the power are, almost without exception, not in the hands of immigrants, and firmly in the hands of white men most of whom went to a limited range of schools with each other. So whatever I don't like, the first question is can I trace the responsibility back to the bastards with the money and power to have made it happen.
And guess what. Ninety nine times out of a hundred I can, and it turns out the Polish plumber or the Zimbabwean refugee wasn't actually the problem at all.
That's why the rich love fascism and racism. It stops working people looking for the real enemy. End of story.
And guess what. Ninety nine times out of a hundred I can, and it turns out the Polish plumber or the Zimbabwean refugee wasn't actually the problem at all.
That's why the rich love fascism and racism. It stops working people looking for the real enemy. End of story.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
This is dead right.
Regarding refugees specifically, they are mostly dumped in deprived areas, often, as happened in Hastings, in housing stock that is deemed of too poor quality to rent out.
That's your answer to anyone claiming refugees get priority. In reality, they are people who've been forced to leave their own homes and come to a country that mostly treats them like shit. Please don't add to that shit by blaming them for your woes.
And Butchers, instead of asking others what their point is all the time, why don't you tell us what your point is. Stop hiding behind quotes from books you've read.
1 I think just about anybody who argues that economic migration is a good thing. The misery economic migration causes is obviously felt more in poorer nations.
The idea that being opposed to economic migration makes you some kind of fellow traveller of fascists is nonsense.
Fascists like the NF may have opposed immigration on race grounds but racism is about believing in racial superiority not about believing in immigration controls.
Look at Hitler,look at mussolini, look at White Australia and Apartheid South Africa......People who believed firmly in migration and racial superiority.....
2 For a variety of reasons. But pro immigration views are never going to be popular amongst people who recognise the consequences of economic migration on them are likely to be more negative than positive.
Pro immigration views are most popular amongst people who have most to gain...People who can afford Eastern european nannies and cleaners and who eat out a lot......The more capital you have the more likely you are to benefit from economic migration...
unless of course you happen to be an economic migrant
I think you will find a lot of economic migrants are also firmly against economic migration.....
I know that wont make sense to some people on here as it demands a bit of thought but hopefully you know what i mean.
of course i know what you mean
the fact is economic migration is a good thing for economic migrants
What you think economic migration is a good thing for all economic migrants???? Surely not.....
Some of them may do very well out of it, but many don't. And it frequently means reluctantly leaving friends and families behind.
The people who do best out of economic migration are those with the access to most money in the first place. And that of course includes non migrants as well as economic migrants.
well yes, what your saying is that people with more money do better
the most recent wave of economic migrants, the polish, have either done well out of it or gone home, poland has also done quite well out of it with wages having been forced upwards due to a labour shortage
im not arguing that employers don't do well out of economic migration, but to deny that the migrants themselves havent also is nonsense
and the most recent wave of migrants was working class by and large, which is why its become an issue because prior to Poland joining the EU there was a long period where most migrants were middle class, largely because unless youre EU the chances of getting in are pretty slim unless youre a doctor or some other mc professional
now indian doctors coming here was not good for India, but was it good for the wc here?
it was only with the opening up of the EU thatworking class jobs became under threat
theres a whole heap of competing class interests going on and to be 'against' economic migrants is ultmately to value the needs of one section of the working class against the needs of another using the arbitary definition of where they happen to be born
Looks like you have missed my point completely. The issue is not for or against economic migrants its for or against economic migration.
And nobody has suggested that no economic migrants have done well from economic migration. But again the issue is not just about the effects of economic migration on migrants but how it makes problems of worldwide inequality worse.
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
But 99% of migration throughout history has been 'economic'.
And many migrants send money back home to their families - as well as those who return home after a few years in the west with money and/or valuable expericence and skills.
There is a specific issue about draining skilled workers from coutnries that can ill afford to spare them - but the answer is not to deny people the right to look for a better life somewhere else, but to assist greater training programmes in those countries where this is happening. (as well as to change policies/power structures wherby rich countries screw those countries into the ground). Also - is Zimbabwe or Iraq fucked becasue skilled people are leaving for the west? No - that is clearly a sympton of a far deeper malise.
The argument that migration is detrimental to the countries where people are migrating from looks to me like a virtuous fig leaf covering up good old xenophobia.
but can you really be against migration and not against migrants
if migration is causing such problems then surely a degree of culpability has to fall on those migrating
or is this like that weird liberal christian line that says homosexuality is A SIN, but we've got nothing against teh gays
the reason youre tying yourself up in knots is that you dont actually have to be pro or anti migration, people migrate when resources are scarce, always have, always will, you cant stop it
so instead of being pro or anti its more a question of how communties deal with that
the anti-immigration lefties on here run around flapping weve got to talk about immigration without ever actually addressing it, preferring to cast down lofty morality on no-one in particular
in the absence of imminent global communist revolution i cant fully support the no borders position, but at least its a fucking position
which is more than youve got
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Economic migration is not a cause of inequality or injustice. It is a response to inequality and injustice.
exactly however it always easier to be middleclass and have this perspective than to be working class and have it.
well if your a middlelcass professional then yeah
To any one with common sense inequality and injustice obviously causes inequality and injustice which is always felt by those at the bottom of society the most . To say that economic migration is not a cause of inequality and injustice is simplistic sawpy nonesense which plays into the hands of the far right.Sorry but that may be how a lot of Guardian and Daily Mail readers see it.....But its certainly not the way i see it.
The way i see it people are bound to do what they see as in their own and their families best interests.
So no i dont blame them i would probably do exactly the same in their situation. But that does not mean we should be uncritical of economic migration.....
In a capitalist world we are all competing against each other for resources....Does that mean we should condemn anyone who has a job etc etc.....Only a twat would say so......
But does that mean as we all accept that we have to compete for jobs and housing etc in this society that unregulated competition is good.
To be clear i do have a position i am against the so called free movement of capital and labour.
I think both need to be regulated because i dont believe in free market politics....
The people who seem to believe you can support one without the other just have not given the issue enough thought in my view.
Similar threads
