If you are about making a better world you cannot decide that one group of people are entitled to be part of it and another group of people are to be excluded. It seems to me that is what underpins all immigration laws. They are a continuation of the division of humanity under imperialism and colonialism. The rich dominant countries live of the spoils of their power: giving a small sliver of the ill-gotten gain to the ordinary people of their own populations. The result is that most fall for what must be the biggest exercise in divide and rule that has ever been undertaken.
Confronted with what has happened to individuals in the places from which they came ordinary people feel what it is natural to feel. The same when people they know are faced with having their lives tipped upside down to be returned to face likely torture or other mistreatment. It is when people are told that there is, to coin a phrase, a phantom menace, that they feel scared and fall for racist lies.
The Tories are likely to fight dirty in the upcoming election and even dirtier if there is another election later in the year after a hung Parliament. Right wing “dog whistle” politics will lead them into vilification of immigrants in general asylum seekers in particular. There are no votes to lose for them in such tactics.
The Labour Party will face a choice. Will it stay true to form and try to out right-wing the Tories or will at least some of it do what all socialists should do automatically.
Links: What Do Labour Bloggers Have to Say on Yarl’s Wood
I suspect, as has happened for the last 15 years, they will try to out-racist the Tories’ racism. In the case of Liam Byrne and Phil “my daughters suffer from immigration” Woolas, they even pre-empt any racism from the Tories.
I want to support Labour, but because of this stuff, and their record on racism towards immigrants, I cannot.
Yesterday the Tories in my area teamed up to demand harsher laws on travellers (making straightforward trespass a criminal offence). A local Lib Dem MP joined in the fun by saying travellers left a deluge of mess, filth and problems and caused thousands of pounds worth of damage, and he would support ANY laws which gave the police more powers against them.
Labour’s record on migration & asylum has been horrific but Labour didn’t join in the attacks in this case. Labour’s problem is (generally) being unwilling to challenge the racist consensus whereas the Tories are happy to conspire to push the consensus further towards fascism.
Is it acceptable, then, for travellers to leave mess, filth and problems behind them? Do you seriously imagine people just make this stuff up because they are racist? Have you ever had the misfortune to have a bunch of so-called travellers install themselves near your house?
When you’re talking about race issues pertaining to travellers, be aware that only a tiny minority of UK travellers are “Roma gypsies” or “Irish travellers” – the only groups recognised by the Race Relations Act as ethnic minorities. Also be aware that these groups, historically and culturally, placed emphasis on supporting (rather than being a burden to) the communities in which they stayed – a vision to which some, I dare say, still aspire.
The majority of UK travellers are so-called “New Travellers”. These people have no claim to ethnic background. It’s hardly racist to criticise these people for failing to live up to the same standards applied to other British people i.e. get a job, respect private property, pay your own way, and live within the law.
Some gypsies & travellers do leave mess behind them. Not all. Some people who live in houses are anti-social too, you know. Lumping all gypsies & travellers together and saying they all do is racist. Just as criticising them for not paying any tax is (on legal sites they do, the trouble is there aren’t enough legal sites).
And no, people don’t make this stuff up purely because they are racist, they make it up because they think it’s what they need to say to win elections.
Oh, and btw, I accept that not all travellers are of Irish or Roma descent, but I don’t see what that has got to do with anything. More punitive laws against all travellers will affect people who are of Irish and Roma descent too. And I’ve never heard of a case where hatred and hostility against travellers was reduced after people found out that this particular group of travellers were of Roma or Irish descent and therefore it was ok for them to practice their culture.
“Lumping all gypsies & travellers together and saying they all do is racist”. No it’s not, it’s just a generalisation about behaviour which may or may not be approximately justified by the empirical evidence (and I happen to believe it is). It’s precisely as racist as saying “all car-owners drive too fast” or “all music-lovers play their music too loud” or “all men are rapists” – all foolish comments, but nothing to do with race.
As I pointed out, with the exception of Roma and Irish ethnic groups, travellers are a group defined by their lifestyle not by race. In the majority of cases, that’s a lifestyle that they have chosen in preference to the one they were born into. It has absolutely nothing – one big fat zilcho – to do with race.
“I accept that not all travellers are of Irish or Roma descent, but I don’t see what that has got to do with anything”. Because this is a post about immigration, asylum and racism. You chose to bring the traveller community up, which has pretty little connection with immigration or asylum, hence my assumption that you intended this as a contribution about racism. Shall I retract my assumption and assume instead that you were just opening up about something irrelevant?
“I’ve never heard of a case where hatred and hostility against travellers was reduced after people found out that this particular group of travellers were of Roma or Irish descent”. As it happens I’ve heard of a couple of cases where travellers arrived, obtained permission from landowners, performed paid services for people in the village, and didn’t leave a mess. Nobody even bothered to ask their ethnic origin. Yet again, it’s not about race, it’s about behaviour in a group that defines itself largely by its behaviour, and in which behaviour is all-too-often found wanting.
“they make it up because they think it’s what they need to say to win elections.” – as I noted, you probably wouldn’t say that if your life had been made miserable (as happened to my aunt and, on a separate occasion, a schoolfriend) by a crowd of travellers. No need to go into detail about the impact they had on the community – the Lib Dem MP you quote sums it up admirably.
I can’t be bothered to re-hash my post of yesterday, although I note you haven’t responded.
http://harpymarx.wordpress.com/2010/02/28/tories-still-the-nasty-racist-party/#comment-6217
“If you are about making a better world you cannot decide that one group of people are entitled to be part of it and another group of people are to be excluded.” Yet that’s exactly what TUs do – and you LOVE them!
“They are a continuation of the division of humanity under imperialism and colonialism”. As is the continued failure of the developed world to drop protectionism in favour of free trade, a move which would (according to World Bank estimates) have 20 times (yes, twenty) the impact of the entire world’s aid programmes. But would you support free trade at the expense of developed world employment? Put it another way, which UK Trade Union supports free trade?
“There are no votes to lose for them in such tactics.” In contrast with the Labour party, which has built up the Civil Service as a guaranteed electoral asset. On my count, however, there are many more Civil Servants than there are asylum seekers – so who are you calling a gerrymander?
If you think civil servants are a guaranteed Labour vote, you obviously haven’t come across PCS.
Not sure I get the point. Are you saying PCS will turn out for the Lib Dems or Tories?
Or, as I suspect, are you saying the PCS will vote for SWP or other lunatics? In which case they increase the prospects of Tories winning – if they are that thick then the taxpayer shouldn’t employ them to change loo-roll let alone run diversity workshops or other such valuable events.
[...] laments the use of asylum seekers as a party political [...]