New Green Party policies on banks (and migration)

[durruti02]

I think it is important to recognise that there ARE migrants into Britain and that Britain is a popular place to migrate to. That we HAVE to recognise that British society is now comprised of a fair number of people of migrant backgrounds and short of mass deportation, we've got to live with that.

Wishing back to a 1950s indigenous Britain with "local jobs for local workers" is the road to nowhere.

Even if there was an end to migration from outside the EU, the Poles or Lithuanians etc would still come and go, come and go, with some staying.
Or are you against the European project, not nescessarily equal to the the EU of course.

first i absolutely agree with your first point .. indeed much of the UK has always been a immigrant society ... and as i have satted over and over i have no problem with this .. my point is entirely that our society has been based on the crimes of the past .. the forced migrations of the irsh and jews, the highland clearences, empire and also the use of some immigrants as cheap labour, but fundamentally that we have had to follow where capital wants to exploit and employ instead of the other way around

but the fundamental point remains .. what society do we want?

.. one in which we are forced to follow capital .. in which the tories and thatcherites tell us to 'get on your bike'??? in which our communities and families are riven as capital restructure ( again)

is that really what we want? is that what you want? and on the re the thread, is that what the Green Party want??

or do you they and we want a society where people actually have some control over where and how they live and work? where the bosses can NOT bypass local people as they cost too much and are too cynical and are untrained? where we decide amongst ourselves what our societies priorities are?

personally i am at a loss to understand opposition from so called socialists to this POV .. ( not sure of your politics) ..

and illustrated by your wierd idea that i support some '1950s indigenous britain' with that expressions smell of racism and protectionism .. bonkers i am expressing something about ordinary people controlling there own lives .. it seems this is too alien a concept

 

[durruti02]

hi chilango .. you made some pretty nasty unfounded accusations at me on here .. i have replied to them .. could you please give a response

 

[belboid]

2) see above

...

5) he can answer that but i do not believe so .. he does not argue for immigration control as you continuosly imply

your 'comment' re 2) does not in any way reply to mine, You claimed I said something I hadn't, and then refuse to back it up, or admit your mistake.

5) he does sup[port IC's, and he has said say on many occasions. you have also said before that you know he supports IC's. So you are lying here once more.

there's not really any point trying to discuss this topic with you, you're arrogance and histrionics always make such a thing a tad difficult, but when you start straight out lying, well, good night.

 

[durruti02]

lol, what a divvock. Much better people starve innit? Freedom of thought and movement, only for the rich.
What a cunt.

belboid .. what am i to make of this ^^^ but the idea that migrnats are starving?

 

[durruti02]

your 'comment' re 2) does not in any way reply to mine, You claimed I said something I hadn't, and then refuse to back it up, or admit your mistake.

5) he does sup[port IC's, and he has said say on many occasions. you have also said before that you know he supports IC's. So you are lying here once more.

there's not really any point trying to discuss this topic with you, you're arrogance and histrionics always make such a thing a tad difficult, but when you start straight out lying, well, good night.

oh belboid ( sighs )

1) you made a qoute about "Much better people starve innit" what am I and others to make of that?? .. afaics you are suggesting migrants are starving

2) i am not tbaldwin .. i do not monitor his beliefs night and day .. i honestly thought he did not support immigration controls but action against employers .. i believe he is wrong on this ( though he is a good man and the criticisms of his pov on here have been ludicrous) .. and

BUT I am NOT baldwin .. if you wish to argue with him thats up to you but you have been talking shit about me .. not a one off but repeatedly

.. so please answer the question as to why after several years of being told you are wrong do you say over and over and over that i support IC?

 

[tbaldwin]

belboid is right about me arguing for immigration controls though. But 90% wrong about most other things he goes on about.

 

[belboid]

.. so please answer the question as to why after several years of being told you are wrong do you say over and over and over that i support IC?

probably something to do with the shit way you make your points, and your consistent defence of defenders of immigration controls.

 

[belboid]

belboid is right about me arguing for immigration controls though. But 90% wrong about most other things he goes on about.

naah, i've got you down to a T

 

[durruti02]

probably something to do with the shit way you make your points, and your consistent defence of defenders of immigration controls.

what a piss poor defence .. intellectual feebleness of the highest order ..

ok so you accept you totally ignore what i say?? (yes?) and continue to lie about me (yes?) because you do not like the way i say what i believe! ( yes?)

.. belboid that is really sad mate! childish beyond belief

( btw what i believe as i have said ad nasueum that migrants are being used and abused under neo liberalism and the best way to deal with that is unionisation of all workplaces )

and what on earth is this "..your consistent defence of defenders of immigration controls.." .. oh ffs have you ever heard of Macarthy? you should be fucking ashamed of yourself with crap like that

are you refering to me arguing against the demonisation of TB?? you have lost it here

i have consistently disgree with ICs on here .. but i do NOT assume that ALL those who suppport ICs are scum .. particularly when i know TB, his years fighting fascism and racism in east london and that everything about his personal life shows that you are wrong ..

you have really shown up yourself with that post .. really poor .. really poor

 

[durruti02]

now what was that about ' starved'? what did you mean about that?

 

[belboid]

ok so you accept you totally ignore what i say?? (yes?) and continue to lie about me (yes?) because you do not like the way i say what i believe! ( yes?)

that doesnt even make sense you daft sod.

reply as much as you like, i wont reply to you, there is no point trying when you keep making things up.

 

[durruti02]

that doesnt even make sense you daft sod.

reply as much as you like, i wont reply to you, there is no point trying when you keep making things up.

me making stuff up? .. belboid you have really lost it ..

this is about YOU lying continuously about me over several years .. what would you think about someone who continually misrepresented and lied about you?

this is about YOU continually lying about me saying i support immigration controls and then doing a bullshit macarthyist justification

frankly pathetic .. and frankly sad that you are not man enough to accept that you are wrong and apologises

 

[ymu]

Durruti, I also was under the impression that you supported immigration controls. It is something to do with the way you put your points across, although your support of tbaldwin does reinforce the impression.

The odd thing is, you appear to have the same position as everyone you were arguing against in the thread, and disagree with the person you have been supporting.

 

[chilango]

hi chilango .. you made some pretty nasty unfounded accusations at me on here .. i have replied to them .. could you please give a response

Sorry Durruti, I had no intention of making any "nasty accusations".

Getting your and balders arguments confused. My apologies.

 

[durruti02]

Sorry Durruti, I had no intention of making any "nasty accusations".

Getting your and balders arguments confused. My apologies.

appreciate this very much chilango in the heat of these threads it is easy to get mixed up sometimes .. i certainly do!

 

[durruti02]

Durruti, I also was under the impression that you supported immigration controls. It is something to do with the way you put your points across, although your support of tbaldwin does reinforce the impression.

The odd thing is, you appear to have the same position as everyone you were arguing against in the thread, and disagree with the person you have been supporting.

cheers ymu .. clealry i do not always get my pov over as i want! ( takes note )

ok not ever have i supportted IC .. i thought about it a few years ago as a 'leftist transistional demand on capital' .. but frankly i think immigration controls are not the issue re controlling migration ( look at the USA) BUT are a serious issue as regards 'disciplining the workforce' .. so i am against



..imho the issue is what happens ( and what is allowed to happen) in workplaces .. and even here i want it to be unions dictating to the bosses NOT the state dictating ..

so yes i do essentially agree with e.g. belboid that the absolute key is unionisation BUT ( and this is the contreverisal bit ) i also think we have to shout from the roof tops about how migration is used, why it has been used ( those who disagree with me seem imho to have no explanation of why immigration has been so hihgh in recent years ), that it is thatcherite ( get on yer bike) AND to take the debate away from the fascists

btw imho baldwin is coming from the perspective, that any left wing state worth its metal would defend workers from cowboy employers .. that leads him to support IC .. i think wrongly .. but i think he means well ( i know that knowing his long anti racist/anti fascist past ) .. he is NOT coming from a nationalist racist or zenophbic position )

this was a thread i started in oct 07

http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=227641