The whole thing smacks of racism if you ask me and certainly more thatcherite authoritarianism from the Labour party.
probationary citizenship for immigrants
So many years after thatcher is it really doing anyone any favours to say stuff like "more thatcherite authoritarianism from the Labour party"? Its a racist policy, its a Labour Party policy - more to the point it is a policy of government/of state.
So lets not pretend or imply that it is the Labour Party (somehow) implementing someone-else's rascist authoritarian policy.
Devrim wrote:
Boul is right. It is not 'incredible'. It is par for the course.
Devrim
my point wasn't really that it's surprising that the Labour Party (of any parties) were doing this - it was that each new initiative to undermine and further stigmatize immigrants seems to go against the accepted conventions of reasonableness up until that point - and then they get pushed a bit further out with the next initiative.
The boundlessness to this process, I think, is pretty amazing. And I don't think it's just more of the same - I don't think anyone could have proposed this 15 years ago without facing a politically-damaging moral outcry from the liberal classes.
What accepted conventions of reasonableness would those be? And no its obviously not just more of the same, they are pushing it further, but please don't imply either that this is new. The same shit (or very similar) has happened before in periods marked by heightened levels of immigration.
Maybe ask why this is a reaction of the state to immigration - particularly given that this immigration is pretty essential to ensuring there is no skills shortage and that crap jobs that leave our resident unemployed worse off if they were to take them up are being filled. Exploring that, instead of worrying about 'moral outcry' or the lack of it from the "liberal classes" (is that actually a class position?), might be more useful.
Boulcolonialboy wrote:
The same shit (or very similar) has happened before in periods marked by heightened levels of immigration.
I'm not entirely sure we are experiencing heightened levels of immigration - are we? isn't it the level of media/political focus on immigration that is heightened?
Boulcb wrote:
Maybe ask why this is a reaction of the state to immigration - particularly given that this immigration is pretty essential to ensuring there is no skills shortage and that crap jobs that leave our resident unemployed worse off if they were to take them up are being filled. Exploring that, instead of worrying about 'moral outcry' or the lack of it from the "liberal classes" (is that actually a class position?), might be more useful.
ok. so...
give us your analysis then - why is the state reacting in this way?
personally, I think it's because the Labour Party think it's a vote winner (when all their other voter-winners - welfare provision, their more-'ethical'-than-the-Conservatives appearance, and their ability to ensure economic growth/stability are all either discounted as being impossible or are at the moment unachievable) - it also destabilizes this bottom sector of essential workers, and it provides a bit of bonus labour (althoguh this is only going to be pretty superficial as the amount of work actually involved would be pretty miniscule, I would have thought).
It also acts as a further restatement of the view that we shouldn't expect to get 'something for nothing' - the implication being that this is what immigrants are doing when they come to the UK - a line which the Labour Government has been keen to push (both to legitimate itself and to attempt to increase its discipline of the working class) pretty much continuously since the mid-1990s (at least).
The incredible thing, for me, is how successfully they've managed to set this agenda - particularly managing to largely erode the (strength and impact of the) more liberal values in the UK.
Quote:
I'm not entirely sure we are experiencing heightened levels of immigration - are we?
Falling asylum applications certainly, lowest in 15 years. Generally the number of people immigrating and/or claiming asylum closely matches the level of conflict/starvation overseas (as might be expected). As conflicts in East Africa and the Middle East have become less pressing in the last couple of years, applications and movement has generally slowed.
The NSO's statistics on immigration generally only go up to 2004 though, so all this faffing about with points systems and citizenship bollocks is not actually based in anything up to date, afaik.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d90376c-dfb1-11dc-8073-0000779fd2ac.html
Interesting article about immigration in the OECD as a whole.
maybe what's most incredible is that there seems to be no limit to the extent that Labour is prepared to push this anti-immgration line?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/feb/21/immigrationpolicy.immigration