Progressives shouldn't be running scared of UKIP. There are left-wing answers to the questions posed by the party, writes James Bloodworth.
Progressives shouldn’t be running scared of UKIP. There are left-wing answers to the questions posed by the party, writes James Bloodworth
Everyone seems to have a theory as to how the left can defeat UKIP. For some it means robustly calling out the party as ‘racist’; for others it means treading more gently and highlighting the economic benefits of European integration.
For UKIP’s growing base of support, the reasons for the party’s recent surge in the polls are obvious: voters are fed up with the identikit ‘political class’ and want politicians to drastically reduce immigration and pull Britain out of the EU. The solutions therefore are obvious: stick two fingers up to Brussels and pull up the drawbridge on fortress Britain.
But aren’t there perhaps some progressive answers to the questions posed by UKIP? I think so, and without pandering to the regressive instincts of die-hard Kippers there are some areas where UKIP is currently getting an easy rise through a fear many progressives have of confronting the party on its own turf.
Indeed, UKIP is being allowed to position itself as the only party that’s willing to talk openly about a whole range of issues that worry voters. This is dangerous. It’s also misguided, for on a number of the areas where UKIP is currently allowed to hold sway the left actually has some powerful arguments it could use to push back against Farage’s toxic fearmongering.
Make immigration work for unskilled workers
Most lefties will know the stats almost of by heart by now: migrants from the EU make a substantial contribution to public finances in Britain and are far less likely to claim out-of-work benefits than working age UK nationals. That said, the effect of immigration on a person’s wage packet depends largely on where they sit on the income scale: on average low-wage workers lose out while medium and high-paid workers gain according to the respected Migration Observatory.
Over the long-term the negative effects on employment and wages tend to be mitigated by growth; but in the meantime it’s important to address the plight of unskilled British workers who are worried about the effect immigration could have on their prospects of work. This means recognising that the immigration experience differs across the social classes. It also means we must…
Understand the importance of trade unionism
Following on from my first point, it’s absolutely vital that we recognise the important role trade unions can play in assuaging some of the fears people have about immigration. After all, anyone with any kind of socialist or social democratic background ought to understand why employers might happily opt for Eastern European workers over their British counterparts. British workers have higher wage expectations, a better understanding of their rights at work and are more likely to seek out trade union representation than migrant workers.
Rather than trying to force British workers to compete in a race to the bottom with migrant workers, the left should see its primary task as to unionise migrant workers and educate them as per their rights at work. In an economic sense, a British worker has far more in common with an Eastern European worker than he does with his employer after all.
Recognise that integration is not a dirty word
In embracing the best of multiculturalism too often progressives ignore the potential challenges that come with it. A community of people from different backgrounds sharing values and broadening each other’s cultural experiences is what multiculturalism should be; an assortment of isolated communities that barely interact with each other is actually monoculturalism, and isn’t a cause for celebration.
Too often when a politician calls for migrants to learn English they are accused of pandering to anti-immigration sentiment. And often they are. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a progressive case for migrants to do the things that will help them to become full members of British society. Socialism ultimately starts at the community level, and progressives shouldn’t allow demagogues like Nigel Farage play on public concerns about integration (or a lack of it). The left should have its own answers as to how we create a sense of community in the places where the level of immigration is high.
25 Responses to “There are left-wing answers to the questions posed by UKIP”
Dave Roberts
We have the same problems in Spain. When Romania joined whatever it was we had six hundred thousand Roma arriving in the first two years. They haven’t really put a strain on the employment situation because they are mostly employed in crime of various kinds and begging. Our social services are strained to breaking point. All except the schools as Roma prefer to have their children earning money than studying.
I was home a few weeks ago and on the Whitechapel Road in East London near where I was born. There were literally hundreds of Somali men in about five hundred yards hanging around in groups or in the many cafes that have sprung up. They certainly weren’t working and paying tax but certainly claiming benefits of some kind. Explain please.
Michael Simpson
Sure.
Michael Simpson
There are two cautionary migration tales here. The first of the British ex-pat who has the audacity to complain of immigrants arriving in a country they no longer live in, and the second the wave of economic migrants who, a little more flush with cash, left London’s east end for Hertfordshire and Essex, as the cockneys did in the post-war period. It may sound perverse now, but up until the 1980s London’s population was decreasing. As such, the housing stock was deteriorating and it was precisely because of the cheap rents in places like Whitechapel that newer arrivals made homes their there as the Irish and the Jews did before them. Now, I’m sure you are completely au fait with the notion of wealthier, largely white but completely middle class youngsters who are now pitching up in the area, forcing up rents to ridiculous levels and as a result pricing out Somalis, Bangladeshis, Cockneys and the rest?
Sue Jones
It’s the Tories however, that created a huge reserve army of labour in the UK through their uneconomic policies, and growing unemployment -much hidden by those off record – those on sanctions or workfare, awaiting appeal and mandatory review, those who died or are in prison – all of these people are not in the unemployment stats, as the government do not track them.
This growing reserve army of labour deflates wages, reduces workers bargaining power and lowers working conditions and workers rights. Benefits have been reduced to below the cost of basic survival, and many cannot afford to eat and heat their homes.
Migrants work for less,and a lot of the time take ons that no-one else wants. However, the important point is this: employees are employed – they don’t ‘take’ jobs. And greedy, exploitative employers pay their workers as little as possible. That needs to be recognised.
darwins beard
Do you acknowledge there is a difference between some who buys a house in another country at their own expense and pay taxes in that new place of residence ect, and someone who arrives in a country to take advantage of the system set up by people over generations of hard work (yes including migrants) ? Secondly do you think that telling someone how they should or should not feel about their country of origin especially in a country where the majority of people in the Capital city were not born in that country is right or proves that those least affected my mass immigration ie middle and upper classes/ university educated, home counties types are dictating what those most effected should think and feel about this prove this man right ?