Immigration from an Anarchist perspective
May 31 2007 19:26
Theyre seems to be a fundemental lack of material, can anyone help me locate sites, literature, handouts etc? Even on libcom the library is sparse on the subject.
Also does anyone know of any existing groups within the UK which are worth bothering with? The No One Is Illegal network didnt return my emails so Im assuming there near inactive and some of the sites I checked seemed way out of date.
May 31 2007 20:07
#2
Anarchists have got a really unique slant on this issue.
May 31 2007 20:26
#3
you're right, what we need to do is introduce an 'immigrants only' policy. Then we'll be unique again.
May 31 2007 20:31
#4
If you ask me, what we need to do is stop applying this 'caring' attitude and organize society in a way that allows the working class to become autonomous in a meaningful way.
May 31 2007 20:38
#5
Eh?
May 31 2007 22:14
#6
There's stuff like this:
http://www.noborders.org.uk/
http://makebordershistory.org/workspace/Main_Page
I'm not sure I'm convinced by it all though.
May 31 2007 22:18
#7
Quote:
Eh?
It's my "evil twin" again. Can you believe it? Talk about cult of the personality.
May 31 2007 23:56
#8
rkn wrote:
There's stuff like this:
http://www.noborders.org.uk/
http://makebordershistory.org/workspace/Main_PageI'm not sure I'm convinced by it all though.
What? 
Jun 1 2007 09:14
#9
Quote:
rkn wrote:There's stuff like this:
http://www.noborders.org.uk/
http://makebordershistory.org/workspace/Main_PageI'm not sure I'm convinced by it all though.
Why aren't you convinced? Noborders are pretty good IMO, but would like to hear any criticisms you might have of it rkn.
Jun 1 2007 09:27
#10
We have content on the subject here:
http://libcom.org/tags/immigration
But it's mostly news.
I don't know about rkn, but I'm not sure of the utility of some of the single issue anarchoid immigration groups.
I think some anarchists use quite poor arguments about it as well - Direct Action magazine, for example, said that the UK needed immigrants because they helped the economy. For people who want to destroy the economy that shouldn't bother us.
That said what is far worse like that are the anarchists (like durruti02 on urban75) which have swung the other way and basically attack immigrants for undercutting british workers' wages. Attacking the immigrants or immigration itself is bullshit - the answer is to demand decent pay and conditions for all.
The WSM have written a couple of decent things on this subject... we should put some in the library
edit - ah here's a good one:
http://struggle.ws/wsm/rbr/rbr7/openborders.html
Jun 1 2007 09:46
#11
Quote:
the answer is to demand decent pay and conditions for all.
Obviously not. The answer is to take control of the money supply and let communities to decide their own composition. As to immigration itself, well, there’s nothing wrong with controlling it. The question is, how it’s controlled and in whose interests.
Quote:
said that the UK needed immigrants because they helped the economy. For people who want to destroy the economy that shouldn't bother us.
Ha ha. Well if they destroy the economy the immigrant “problem” will solve itself.
Jun 1 2007 11:08
#12
Lazy Riser wrote:
Quote:
the answer is to demand decent pay and conditions for all.Obviously not. The answer is to take control of the money supply and let communities to decide their own composition.
What the fuck?
So was Britain some kind of state anarchist society before Gordon brown gave the bank of england independence?
Jun 1 2007 11:34
#13
Quote:
which have swung the other way and basically attack immigrants for undercutting british workers' wages.
That's not true. Durrutti does not "attack immigrants". He attacks immigration, used by the bosses to undercut wages. Similar to when the First International tried to stop "foreign" labour being brought in to scab. This wasn't "attacking immigrants". And what is wrong with criticising the immigration policies of the ruling class? They determine the numbers who come in and out. They're in control of it.
There's a decent article on immigration here by Red Action: http://www.redaction.org/bulletins/editorials_v4.html#4_9
Jun 1 2007 11:41
#14
mk12 wrote:
Durrutti does not "attack immigrants". He attacks immigration, used by the bosses to undercut wages.
whatever ... he's still missed the point in that he's attacking immigration rather than those with the power to create or benefit from the system of immigration.
Jun 1 2007 11:42
#15
Lazy Riser wrote:
As to immigration itself, well, there’s nothing wrong with controlling it
yes there is.
Jun 1 2007 11:42
#16
Quote:
Obviously not. The answer is to take control of the money supply and let communities to decide their own composition.
Quote:
So was Britain some kind of state anarchist society before Gordon brown gave the bank of england independence?
Bless. A nationalised BoE gives us no more control over the money supply than a nationalised mine gives us control over coal production.
Jun 1 2007 11:47
#17
What have nations ever been other than trouble anyway?
Jun 1 2007 11:50
#18
@john - Even community control?
Jun 1 2007 12:01
#19
mk12 wrote:
@john - Even community control?
"community control" is quite a meaningless term. For a decent system management of migration you'll need large scale organisation and decision-making, for example if natural disaster or disease forces millions of people to be displaced.
Migrants themselves also of course need a stake in decision making.
mk12 wrote:
Quote:
which have swung the other way and basically attack immigrants for undercutting british workers' wages.That's not true. Durrutti does not "attack immigrants". He attacks immigration, used by the bosses to undercut wages.
He constantly bangs on about it, playing up to the right wing scapegoating of immigrants. The immigration itself is a red herring - the issue is low wages themselves. When women joined the workforce some men/unions complained they were being used to lower wages. This doesn't mean you oppose them entering the workforce, or call for state controls on it. All divisions of the working class based on gender, nationality, race, etc. are entirely arbitrary.
Quote:
Similar to when the First International tried to stop "foreign" labour being brought in to scab. This wasn't "attacking immigrants".
You got links on this? Obviously there's nothing wrong with stopping scabbing, but immigrants here aren't being used as scabs on british strikes, so it's an irrelevant point. I believe durruti started a thread comparing them to scabs though, right? I don't read u75 any more cos it's politics forums are shit, but I seem to recall something like that.
Quote:
And what is wrong with criticising the immigration policies of the ruling class? They determine the numbers who come in and out. They're in control of it.
If you're arguing against them permitting immigration then it's stupid, because then all you're doing is demanding more ruling class control of immigration. And they'll never do it in workers' interests.
The communist/working class argument on immigration is always to get together with migrants to fight together for decent working conditions and service provision. Like the old IWW did, like Italian workers did in the 60s/70s, etc.
Quote:
There's a decent article on immigration here by Red Action: http://www.redaction.org/bulletins/editorials_v4.html#4_9
I'll check it out...
Jun 1 2007 12:03
#20
Lazy Riser wrote:
Quote:
Obviously not. The answer is to take control of the money supply and let communities to decide their own composition.Quote:
So was Britain some kind of state anarchist society before Gordon brown gave the bank of england independence?Bless. A nationalised BoE gives us no more control over the money supply than a nationalised mine gives us control over coal production.
Do you have any idea at allw what you are talking about. I actually am having difficulty coming back to this cos it so utterly ridiculous.
Jun 1 2007 12:03
#21
Quote:
What have nations ever been other than trouble anyway?
Too true. Immigration is essentially a question of capital deployment and peoples’ natural inclination against change that doesn’t benefit them directly (let alone change which increases competition for cash). Questions that many “anarchists” are ideologically unable to answer apart from expressing their usual anti-racist sentiments.
Jun 1 2007 12:09
#22
I'm off to lunch, but one quick thought. Like various "anarchists" who support national liberation struggles in one country without thinking of the effect it has in other countries (for example scottish nationalists and the effects in England), these people who say they want what's best for the working class are only thinking about the native English working class. Not the working class migrants themselves (who can get huge wage increases by moving), nor the working class in the migrants' home countries. And of course things like skilled labour leaving a country en masse leaves the workers left there with more power, proportionally, and exerts an upward pressure on wages in the host country (like employers in the UK forced to put up wages to stem the "brain drain" to the US).
And on a pragmatic point, which I obviously don't support but which is nevertheless accurate, if wages weren't lowered in a lot of jobs here they would be outsourced to countries where labour is cheaper anyway. Even despite migration this still happens - the other day I read about a bunch of Polish factory workers here who were all sacked when their factory was outsourced to Poland.
Jun 1 2007 12:13
#23
Quote:
these people who say they want what's best for the working class are only thinking about the native English working class.
How dare they. To be fair, they’re also thinking of the interests of the working class immigrants that are already here. Like BNP “Third Wayists”. (Ho ho)
Quote:
I actually am having difficulty coming back to this cos it so utterly ridiculous.
What’s ridiculous, george, is that you’ve descended into your usual mockery as a response to your “difficulty”.
Jun 1 2007 12:14
#24
mk12 wrote:
@john - Even community control?
If it's controlled by the global community - and in a libertarian way - then I'm all for it.
Jun 1 2007 12:17
#25
Libertarian control?
Jun 1 2007 12:27
#26
Quote:
And of course things like skilled labour leaving a country en masse leaves the workers left there with more power, proportionally, and exerts an upward pressure on wages in the host country
not sure that the departure of a swath of skilled labour from one country leaves those remaining with more power, in very simple theoretical demand & supply terms then yes the cost of labour should rise, but taking poland as an example this is not something that is being seen in practice, partly due to the massive influx of ukranians and belarussiians to fill the gap, who are actually creating downward pressure on wages at the moment and partly due to the high level of unemployment existing in the country in the first place (which drives the desire to migrate in the first place), so theres not really any conditions that would exert an upwards pressure on wages
Jun 1 2007 12:35
#27
Even if it was true, it's still at the level of appealing to people make sacrifices which won’t demonstrably benefit them down stream. The success of this technique speaks for itself, in so far as it has achieved the opposite of what it intended. It makes thinking politically into an misguided altruistic activity which has more in common with Bob Geldof than Lucy Parsons.
Jun 1 2007 12:49
#28
also could argue that the money that gets sent back to poland my immigrants in uk has an upwards pressure on prices through inflation without a corresponding increase in wages for those who are left
but as lazy says these are incidental points in the wider argument
Jun 1 2007 12:49
#29
Lazy Riser wrote:
Even if it was true, it's still at the level of appealing to people make sacrifices which won’t demonstrably benefit them down stream.
not having to be interrogated by an obnoxious thick-as-shit arse hole every time I want to leave the country will demonstrably benefit me in the immediate term.
Jun 1 2007 13:04
#30
I thought anarchists were in favour of power being in the hands of people in their communities and workplaces? If this was so, would we have "open borders"?
http://www.unitycentreglasgow.org/
The Unity Center in Glasgow is based round the corner from the Home Office here. We offer Asylum Seekers help with their claims, advise them what to do if they feel they are going to be removed. In the past the center volunteers have helped resist dawn raids. The center is run by volunteers making decisions on a consensus basis. There is also the Unity Union of Asylum Seekers run by Asylum Seekers themselves. Also the Glasgow Bail Circle which aims to help people detained in Dungavel get released. Check the site out for more info or contact us through the site.
Hope that helps some.