Actually, centrism is.... dialectics! 
Unable to summon much more than snark, I refer you to this review by @VulgarEconomics which actually reviews some of the claims of the piece. vulgareconomics.com/2018/11/its-li…
On the broader claims about Marx, founder of the International Workingmen's Association and lifelong refugee, being anti-immigration, this takes a look at Marx's views on labour competition.
As expected our mentions are simultaneously some people claiming the article doesn't say what it says, and also that what it says is correct and good.
"The US saw the biggest wave of external migration in its history: between 1880 and 1930 around 28 million mainly southern and eastern European proletarians arrived in the US." libcom.org/blog/class-rel…
Eddie Dempsey: member of the RMT's National Executive Committee
Paul Embery: Blue Labour/Executive Council, FBU
Alex Gordon: candidate for general secretary (and former president) of the RMT
James Heartfield: Spiked!/Living Marxism
Aimee Therese: Dead Pundits co-host
Paul Embery: Blue Labour/Executive Council, FBU
Alex Gordon: candidate for general secretary (and former president) of the RMT
James Heartfield: Spiked!/Living Marxism
Aimee Therese: Dead Pundits co-host
"Once unions accept the capitalist economy and their place in it, their institutional interests become bound to the national economy, since the performance of the national economy effects the unions' prospects for collective bargaining." libcom.org/library/unions…
Extra bonus example of the people promoting this.
Good thread on how the history here is skewed. There has always been an anti-immigration strand in the Labour movement, but whether the AFT or the British Seaman's Union it was always opposed to communist/anarchist/syndicalist workplace organising.
People in our mentions keep citing the 'left should vigorously defend migrants against inhumane treatment' and saying that employer immigration checks (with enforcement against employers) isn't anti-migrant. Let's talk about E-Verify then.
Here's an HR consultancy (sorry) explaining E-Verify, with the expectation Trump will make it mandatory for employers. Employers collect ID from applicants, current employees, check against a central government database whether they can legally work in US. hrp.net/articles/e-ver…
There's already a country with a similar mandatory system and employer penalties of $25k a pop for non-compliance. The UK and 'right to work' checks. No central government database in the same way, but the principle is the same.
What this means is if you're without documentation, you can't get a job with a legit employer. It obviously has not stopped undocumented migrants working in the UK because some employers risk the fine. It also hasn't offset any policies targeting migrants themselves.
The Windrush scandal, apart from deportations and denial of medical care for people who'd been in the UK since before 1973, also uncovered several cases of people being sacked due to inability to prove their status.
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politi…
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politi…
So hand car washes, restaurants etc. places that exploit undocumented workers, continue to operate cash in hand, also skipping national insurance and similar. But people with complex, poorly documented or lapsed/contended immigration status now get forced out of regular work.
Events such as DACA work permits expiring or Brexit then give the state, via employers, an entire apparatus to clamp down on those previously 'legal' migrants. Forcing people out of work, giving them a choice of unemployment, the informal economy, or leaving the country.
These kinds of measures then, rather than reducing exploitation of undocumented workers, make the situation of all migrants more precarious. The logic is very similar to SWERF carceral approaches to sex work, including the Nordic model of criminalising clients.
Angela Nagle simultaneously claims to challenge leftist orthodoxy while also claiming orthodox leftism. On top of TUC union leadership figures, Richard Trumka of the AFL-CIO has similar positions on immigration. Here's Trumka endorsing an E-Verify variant
msnbc.com/the-ed-show/af…
msnbc.com/the-ed-show/af…
One more thread dissecting this. On one hand this is classic leftist exile telling you how it is grift, on the other, senior British trade unionists spent yesterday promoting this complete shite. Due to the latter it does require a response.
Christ on a bike.
More on E-verify: employer documentation checks increase exploitation and abuse of migrant workers rather than limiting it.
Another excellent thread.
The Monthly Review article is worth a read by the way.
When you're definitely not giving left cover for neoliberalism.
Tucker Carlson: "many on the left are attacking Hillary Clinton for her flash of insight, one person who isn't is Angela Nagle".
Well how could she after writing this last week?
Well how could she after writing this last week?
Nagle on Frederick Douglass on immigration, vs Frederick Douglass on immigration.
blackpast.org/1869-frederick…
blackpast.org/1869-frederick…
As usual, the source for this claim about Douglass is not offered, but look what's a high result on Google, the anti-immigration Center for Immigration Studies cherry-picking Douglass. Could this be the source?
cis.org/Report/Cast-Do…
cis.org/Report/Cast-Do…
And the same page has this on Garvey. I think it's probably the source.
Both Garvey and Douglass are writing in the context of union and employer enforced exclusion of black workers from skilled jobs, the same source of 'leftist orthodoxy' that was positively cited as anti-immigrant according to Nagle.
For example there was literally one active black participant in the Flint sit down strike, in the '30s, and just a handful of black strikers in total, because the plants were almost exclusively white.
libcom.org/library/genora…
libcom.org/library/genora…
This had changed by the '60s, but the UAW was still excluding black workers from elected positions and sent the police to beat them up.
libcom.org/library/black-…
libcom.org/library/black-…
