Why Immigration Concern Is Racist 104

Since 1979 UK governments have deliberately and systematically pursued policies which prioritised the speculative financial industries of London and damaged large scale manufacturing. The apotheosis of this policy was the massive transfer of money from everybody in the land to the bankers in 2008 by Gordon Brown.

There are two major results of this forty year policy. The first is that the deliberately engineered manufacturing decline has caused social and economic devastation in the UK outside South East England. The second has been an astonishing accumulation of wealth in a tiny number of hands as income inequality levels have risen to the highest disparity in all of human history, wealth centred in South East England.

This has naturally led to rising discontent among many people in many areas, despite the concentrated use of mass communication media under elite control to spread narratives to contain or divert discontent. But as unrest has continued to threaten control, a particular diversionary narrative has become dominant.

In truth, the cause of mass poverty amidst great wealth is the existence of state structures which direct economic activity to the exclusive benefit of a tiny elite of the ultra-rich. But rather than the ultra-rich who control the state structures, ordinary people are encouraged to blame their own lack of access to resources on immigrants. A false narrative is created whereby the cause of poverty is not the billions and billions monopolised by the ultra-rich, but rather that poor foreigner over there.

This is an argument of stunning intellectual paucity. It depends on a totally false narrative of an economy as a thing of fixed size. In fact, immigration is a massive driver of economic growth. If immigration really made countries poorer, then the United States would be the poorest country in the world and Germany the second poorest. That is plainly untrue. Immigration is not the cause of poverty, quite the reverse. It is only the benefit of millions of energetic new migrants that has prevented deflation in the UK these last few years.

Yet, despite being obvious nonsense, the argument sticks. The ultra-rich succeed in diverting the anger of society at inequality of resources, away from themselves and onto that poor foreigner over there.

And why does this obvious nonsense work? Because it appeals to a deep-rooted, basic, instinct of atavism. Because it appeals to a xenophobia that transcends logic and intelligence. Because it is a simple appeal to racism.

Concern about immigration is racism. A racism deliberately whipped up to divert people from their real enemies.

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

104 thoughts on “Why Immigration Concern Is Racist

1 2 3 4
  • John Spencer-Davis

    Craig Murray
    11/03/16 12:54pm

    I think this is something of an argument about semantics. Concern about immigration is not the same thing as racism. You seem to be arguing that racism is instinctive and inherent, something which I would vigorously dispute – I think it is learned, not inherent. I also think the ideological appeal of the false narrative is not to racism but to economic insecurity.

    I agree with everything you say in this posting, except that I do not believe it is helpful to say to the ordinary person in the street that they are racist if they are worried about migrants. It is a highly emotive word and a serious charge and I do not think it is justified. John Hilley made the point recently over on Zenpolitics that if the media consistently referred to the unfortunate people trying to get into Europe and the UK as refugees, rather than migrants, people would probably be a lot more compassionate and accommodating.

    Kind regards,


  • fedup

    As I said here:

    Fact is unless people stop blaming the next wretched soul standing in the queue along with the rest of them, and start opening their eyes and see who are the culprits that have wreaked havoc on their lives this will be the scenario over and again.

    In total agreement Craig, it is a well known and tested method; divide and conquer!! The current waves of refugees wandering around Europe have finally put into the context the mass migrations of the WWII and the rest of the sordid history of that era.

  • DtP

    Not totally convinced. I think there’s also the neo-con agenda and our illegal wars which have the consequences that muslims now hate us rendering it slightly insane allowing unfettered entrance. If governments have no problem with specifically targeting a defined group of people – it’s not really an individual’s responsibility to be happy about it. Racism seems almost irrelevant compared to a million dead Iraquis. Plus, mass migration only helps the ultra-rich even more so i’m not sure who, if anyone, would benefit anyway unless it’s an article of faith rather than politics or economics. I’ve never really understood this obsession with labeling things racist rather than fixing genuine discrimination but whatever floats your boat, I guess.

  • Loony

    You conflate a number of issues in order to arrive at disingenious conclusions.

    Yes, some people have a lot of money and a lot of people have very little money. However money is not a resource, it is merely a medium of exchange for acquiring resources, resources which are largely absent from the UK.

    The required resources (food, energy, raw materials) are mainly acquired from overseas. In exchange the UK offers money – mnoney which it acquires by printing it. Anyone that baulks at this proposed exchange is normally bombed.

    Economic growth is a false paradigm that is manifestly unsustainable on a planet with finite resources.

    With regard to economics do you have any idea what you are talking about? Someone has clearly prevented house price deflation in the UK. So successful have they been that it is all but impossible for any young person to actually ever acquire property ownership. Who does this benefit? Is there some kind of smear de jour to describe people who hate and despise young people simply because they are young?

    The issue is not about immigration it is about people (unless you believe that immigrants are somehow superior to non immigrants – it is hard to see how anyone holding that view would not be racist).

    If it is about people then why are places like Nigeria, Bangladesh and India not swimming in wealth. I am pretty certain that there are more immigrants in South Africa than Germany – so why is the South African economy collapsing and the German economy is not?

    The German economy is doing fine because the euro is designed to ensure that Germany has a competitive advantage. You cannot look at Germany without looking at Greece and the rest of southern Europe. The US is doing fine not because of immigrants but because of the US military. Why do you think the US has overthrown in excess of 50 legitimate governments since 1945? The answer is to protect US hegemonic power.

    Mass immigration of the type currently underway is not about the xenophobia of the ignorant masses. It is one more tool to allow the elites to plunder what remains of the worlds natural resources. They get away with this because useful idiots can relied upon to smear anyone who dares question the policy or to get anywhere near the truth of the matter.

    There is nothing racist to not want the iron heel of oppression to stamp on your face – irrespective of the color of your face.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Craig, Whilst I agree with much of that, the indigenous English have been remarkably, open, welcoming, and tolerant to immigration.

    The demonization of immigrants, by the press only started (specifically against Muslims, directly after 9/11).

    The country has been bombed with anti-Muslim propaganda 24×7 for nearly 15 years. Yet even with this mass psychological attack, the vast majority of English people remain remarkably tolerant, even when what was their local English culture has been totally changed to a foreign one remarkably quickly.

    The process has been so rapidly accelerating, that essentially, the indigenous English are being ethnically cleansed from their own villages, towns and cities.

    This has happened without any violent conflict in the UK, but it is a very dangerous situation when indigenous English people start feeling like Palestinians.

    I suggest you go to Palestine and tell the Palestinians that “Immigration Concern is Racist”…or alternatively Oldham, Preston or Stockton-on-Tees if you can find any English still remaining.


  • Ba'al Zevul

    I don’t agree with your views but you are perfectly entitled to hold them. (Craig, last thread, to me)

    Back at you. Racist? I’m not racist, any more than someone who (say) aspires to an independent Scotland with its own unique culture and traditions and with control over its own borders. Think on.

    I don’t care where they come from, what colour they are, even what religion they follow. The bottom line is that we don’t have the resources to be a national charity, even for half the population we already have.

  • DtP

    @Ba’al Zevul – ooh, good point – is nationalism inherently racist? Simply by being geographic rather than demographic, it has at its base a given discrimination.

  • craig Post author


    Your jibe about Scottish independence is misplaced. The Scottish government has made absolutely plain that one of the reasons it wants independence is to be able to be more liberal and open in immigration policy.

  • Loony

    Do you think the indigenous peoples of North America and Australia were concerned about immigration?

    Considering what happened to them do you think that they would have had rational reasons to have been concerned?

  • fedup

    The country has been bombed with anti-Muslim propaganda 24×7 for nearly 15 years. Yet even with this mass psychological attack, the vast majority of English people remain remarkably tolerant, even when what was their local English culture has been totally changed to a foreign one remarkably quickly.

    Tony you best catch a glimpse of this:

    Not forgetting the number of passengers whom have been kicked out of their flights for; “looked at me suspiciously” as claimed by an stewardess, or “he has prayers on his phone” claimed by a passenger sitting next to the poor “Muslim looking” chap.

  • bevin

    “In fact, immigration is a massive driver of economic growth. … It is only the benefit of millions of energetic new migrants that has prevented deflation in the UK these last few years.”

    Immigration is certainly crucial to the capitalist growth process. It consisted in Britain of the mass movements of the victims of enclosures and clearances from their native communities into the labour market.

    It is this process which is continually being repeated, around the world. (There are said to be about 300 million people sloshing around China between the labour markets in the cities and the villages from which they hale.)It serves two basic purposes, firstly it strips large numbers of people of their property which largely consists of customary rights rooted in their inherited communities. Secondly it throws them, naked and vulnerable onto the labour market.

    The principle at work is that a rolling stone gathers no moss: it applied to the clansman from the Highlands rolling into Glasgow, the Irish from Connacht landing in Swansea or Cardiff, the Northampton smallholder entering Birmingham. And so on.

    In these days the process is repeated as populations are pushed and pulled around the world, most dramatically by imperialist wars but most usually by waking up to find their villages have been bulldozed for soy bean or palm oil plantations or that their hereditary holdings have been sold, by some dictatorial regime, to a Gulf magnate, the Walton family or someone else assembling vast estates.

    There are two big problems with this model. The first is moral: it is wrong to steal from those unable to defend themselves, to put an end to their way of life and communities, to drive them from their native land. It was wrong when Thomas More lamented it in England. It was wrong when sharp tackmen and Lowland lawyers were clear Ducal estates. It is always wrong. And it leads to enormous human suffering which is tattooed into our societies, disfiguring them for centuries. Hardwiring callous behaviours, cynicism and cruelty into humanity.

    The second problem is that it is unsustainable. In a finite world permanent economic expansion is unsustainable-that we know. But in a Capitalist system the cycle which produces growth also requires destruction. It is that destruction which has produced the current vast inequalities: the old manufacturing industries were destroyed, as were the jobs and communities dependent on them. Included in those communities were the self protecting mechanisms-the laws and customs developed to protect people from unrestrained greed, uncontrolled expansion. Among these were Trade Unions but more important were shared standards and beliefs: full employment, free education, equal access to the best healthcare etc.

    So immigration is not necessary but actually something that very few people want. The Poles streaming into London would rather not have to take their chances in a foreign language, starting from the bottom, forced to accept the worst conditions etc.

    This is not to say that Craig’s main point here is not correct: immigrants are not the problem, capitalists are. But popular feeling against immigration is more related to propaganda and indoctrination than atavistic instincts.

    If the media blamed all ills on sunspots or, wait for it, climate change many people would accept that these were the problems.
    The real problem is that if we want societies organised for our benefit we will have to organise them and run them ourselves and learn to wean ourselves from the intellectual crack of opinions and ideologies furnished by academics or experts, working for others, usually the powerful and rich.

  • Tony_0pmoc


    Hilarious – but that was in Croatia. If anyone in England was crazy enough to pull a stunt like that – they might live – in The USA they would be dead within 10 paces.

    Meanwhile, its important to try and understand the concept of exponential growth. For various reasons Western developed cultures have responded well, over the last 30 years, by having significantly less than 2.1 children per female – as low as 1.3 in many countries of Europe. Population decline is extremely important by such cultural processes – as the alternative is disease, famine and war – all of which are deeply unpleasant.

    You simply cannot have exponential growth of anything on a finite planet, but hardly anyone understands what exponential growth is.

    This video explains it very simply, even if you were asleep in your Maths class at school.

    “The Crash Course – Chapter 3 – Exponential Growth”


  • eddie-g

    I agree entirely that immigration is code for xenophobia for a great many people. But I think there’s clearly more to it.

    Related to your point about the economic transformation of Britain, immigration impacts regions asymmetrically. Quite simply, immigrants tend to settle in places where immigrants from the same country have already arrived. The net effect is that certain towns are disproportionately affected, and they get nowhere near enough help from central government (a problem exacerbated by austerity cut-backs) to handle the extra demands on local government.

    And related particularly to the aftermath of the banking crisis of 2008, the economy is still operating below its potential, and wages have stagnated. When you overlay this with the localised impacts for some communities who have seen significant immigration… Britain is hardly the first country to be taking out its frustrations on the “others”. In this case, immigrants.

    For me, and I think for you too, economic stagnation is the root cause of the xenophobic backlash. There’s racism underlying some of it, but it would dissipate into irrelevance if meaningful economic growth returned.

  • Habbabkuk (for fact-based, polite, rational and obsession-free posting)

    Let’s use the word correctly, shall we Craig: to be a racist is to believe in the innate superiority of one race over another (or the innate inferiority of one race against another).

    To be worried about the social and economic effects of large-scale immigration – or even to dislike or fear, on a personal level, a change in the prevalent local “culture” – has nothing to so with racism as (properly) defined.

  • Phil the ex frog

    “In truth, the cause of mass poverty amidst great wealth is the existence of state structures which direct economic activity to the exclusive benefit of a tiny elite of the ultra-rich.”

    Well yes. That’s what it’s for. The nation state is a mythical conception historically developed by those who own and control the wealth so you wave a flag, behave yourself and possibly go and die in defence of their wealth and power.

    And racism is an inevitable consequence of the notion of outsiders baked into the state.

  • Mark Golding

    We live in a world of chaos where strong commercial ties between clans of mutants develop violence and war to accumulate wealth and who regard liberalism as a threat to their existence.

    This fusion of apathetic minds intends to promote a physical world where spirit and sagacity are a diminishing wavelength.

  • fedup

    For various reasons Western developed cultures have responded well, over the last 30 years, by having significantly less than 2.1 children per female – as low as 1.3 in many countries of Europe. Population decline is extremely important by such cultural processes – as the alternative is disease, famine and war – all of which are deeply unpleasant.

    Tony the Western Economic Model revolves around usury and suppression of development in the developing countries with a view to maintain a source of cheap supply of raw materials. The “savings” then are passed on as “government benefits” to the people who are under the charge of the architects of this scheme. Note the benefits that are paid by the government is to aid further profitability of the multinationals by suppressing the labour prices in the West, returning the favour to these multinationals that are busy supporting the various political operatives in their dash to the trough of the leadership.

    Population growth is a contentious issue that does not really revolve around sensible debate. The West is very expensive for anyone to have any offspring, in fact the costs of each child are in the order of hundred thousand pounds by the age of twelve and this figure keeps on rising. (so some of the statistics maintain). However children in the developing/underdeveloped world are looked upon as helpers/assets and not as sinks in the West.

    Taking note of the various water adverts on the TV the six year old black girl on her way to the well head to carry back a container of water is just one example of such assets. In addition, the health issues often mean the number of children born does not equate numbers of children surviving to the age of puberty, and beyond, due to the very high rates of mortality. This is a further promoter of large families.

    The fact that in the twenty first century when humanity has the power and the technology to feed every member of the human race, or to house them and clothe them, and yet we find homelessness on our streets and hungry children in our lands and further a field is an indictment of the failure of the Western Economic Model that despite the glaring and evident mess is still promoted as the only viable model of economy and the only game in town.

    The aggressive promotion of the WEM has resulted in the current plethora of wars that are further suppressing any would be competitors and further undermining nay meaningful development of these countries, as the lawlessness and chaos hat is left in place of their original pre-wars governments.

    Fact that there is such an anti Muslim climate in the West and yet the al saud pederasts are busy further sponsoring the destruction of more Muslim countries (Yemen, Syria) is a telling state of mind that is ruling the west and its’ proxy vassals.

    PS I am glad you had a good chuckle but proves the point that the constant drumbeat of hatred has yielded strange results. People are petrified at anyone wearing an old fashioned nightgown and throwing a white handkerchief/scarf over their head that is kept in place with a tie who is carrying a rucksack and throwing it around. You are of course correct if it was done in UK the chap put would be facing terror charges and in no time will be spending the rest of his life in max security Belmarsh prison.

  • Geoffrey

    I can’t see anything racist about wanting more trees,fields,birds and cows and less houses, cars and shopping centres.

  • AdrianD

    For what it’s worth I wholeheartedly agree with both John Spencer and Tony – racism is (or at least should be) a serious charge and shouldn’t perhaps be made so easily.

    Your final two paragraphs are simply assertions and are not supported by the rest of your post.

    The fact that I almost always agree with you and can find little to fault in the rest of the post, can’t disguise that to my eyes your conclusions here are the kind of arguments for closing down debate that Melanie Philips likes to use.

  • Ba'al Zevul

    Your jibe about Scottish independence is misplaced. The Scottish government has made absolutely plain that one of the reasons it wants independence is to be able to be more liberal and open in immigration policy.

    Given that Scotland’s unique cultural identity has been the one consistent theme underpinning the pro-independence movement (and I stress, I find nothing wrong with that) you might ask, as I do, how the massive importation of alien customs and behaviours can be accomplished without erasing its own. I’m pretty sure there are more Scots who are fluent in Urdu than in Gaelic already.

    I’m not suggesting we all stick in the 1950’s, drink from Coronation mugs, put on ties and sing the national anthem, but when the language most likely to be spoken on a local bus is Polish, it’s gone beyond a fucking joke. Well beyond, for those whose jobs are directly threatened and are looking for somewhere to live in their own country. That’s what Welby’s on about..

  • Nevermind

    Migration happens because of economic downturns. What we feel in the UK is incomparable with the impact, for example, people feel in Portugal,, were safety nets are not in existence.

    Last night, around ten pm, we walked to our hotel past a public car park, loud noises, many voices of children and glimpses through the gates showed women ,children and men from all walks of life getting food hand outs.
    Contrast that with today’s innogural visit by the new president to Porto, his motorcade whisking past after a few minutes in front of Porto,s City Hall. Marcelo is a law prof. A nod a political TV commentator of 20 years, he had a daily show.
    And no, his second name is not Berlusconi…( joke )

    Portugal has suffered far harder than any, not just after the second ww, when Salazar refused the Marshall plan, but the current slump, they have not moved much sine 2008 , they are still in recession.

    To view immigrants with racialist spectacles turns our interests away from the real moves, it’s their most favourite trick, and they know it will always work in England.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    Fedup, I agree with every word. In fact I even agree with Habb. This doesn’t happen very often.

  • Jemand

    Some truth but ultimately false and offensive.

    Immigration does drive economic growth by increasing overall demand for common goods & services as well as infrastructure. But economic growth, in itself, is not necessarily a good thing, because it says nothing about the quality of life of individuals, in particular, the poor.

    In fact, when large enough, net immigration drives population growth which, on a planet of finite resources, will *inevitably* lead to overpopulation that results in environmental destruction and increased competition between members of the poorest segments of society. This will increase poverty.

    Any accusation that critics of immigration, especially that which is unregulated, are racist, is a contemptible unprovable slur. Just another abuse of a dubious pejorative to shout down intelligent debate on the subject.

  • Ed F

    Absolutely pathetic. Anyone who disagrees with you is a racist. You have the mentality of a 1st year university student.

    I’m still amazed you had the brass neck to represent Scotland to a bunch of South Americans. Unbelievable. Even the SNP can see through your bullshit.

  • Tony_0pmoc

    I am exceedingly impressed with what people have written here today, and I thank Craig Murray for allowing us all to write our thoughts here.

    If we all agreed all the time, we would have nothing much to say.

    Of course, none of us have changed his mind, but he’s still a good bloke, and I would buy him a pint if we ever met…

    Just look at the State of the Rest (of The British Establishment)


  • craig Post author

    Ed F

    I do sympathise. It must be terribly upsetting to discover that not everybody agrees with the consensus of your saloon bar milieu. I suggest you stay in it and just listen to that agreeable Mr Farage, who does not challenge you at all.

1 2 3 4

Comments are closed.