Hezbollah and IRGC/Current Iran regime flags, but no Ukraine flags.
Aka only the flags of Putin-allied regimes.
Yeah no this seems sketchy, I think there's some russian meddling involved in this protest to destabilise the country.
It’s actually really absurd and crazy to see just how many people sincerely believe that *Nigel Farage* and fucking *Reform UK* are racist. I genuinely CANNOT wait until these people get to see what real racists look like. Actual racists. Nazis. It might happen sooner than you think. Who knows? The real question is, what will they be called? If Reform supporters are Nazis, then I have to wonder if actual Nazis will cause the entirety of the political Left to collectively have a heart attack and die. I don’t know what you could possibly call them. Giga Nazis? Nah, they’d have to come up with something fresh…
The far right populists feel like a psyop. They blame everything on immigrants, which is a symptom rather than the disease. The disease is a political system and economy system captured by global financial interests and washington dc. The oldest trick in the book is for the elites to find a scapegoat to distract the plebs or better yet - pit them against each other.
If you look at the UK’s despicable material conditions, you’ll find mass privatization of public assets and a hollowing out of industries that previously thrived (and powered regions outside of london), courtesy of thatcher and the neoliberal ideology. Public infrastructure, land, etc. have been acquired and consolidated by financial interests intent on squeezing as much rent out of the country as possible, and because the UK produces nothing, the strength of (demand for) the GBP is entirely dependent upon the UK’s attractiveness as a playground and parking lot for global capital.
In fact, even something as mundane as fishing rights have become feudalized. Fishing rights are owned as income-generating financial assets by a few families and financial interests, while the actual fishermen have to rent those rights to make a living. Tell me - doesn’t that sound like the landed gentry of old?
Why do you need some kinda conspiracy? Why can’t people just be doing dumb stuff and finding dumb solutions on their own? Especially when they’re panicking.
I wouldn’t really consider the Nigel Farage’s and Tommy Robinson’s of Britain to be cornerstones of the establishment, or am I just misreading your point?
Nigel Farage pretty much is a cornerstone of the establishment. Dulwich College educated rich kid, commodities trader job in the city. Endless expenses invesitgations against him for leveraging his EU parliment positions, while almost never turning up for the job, always being paid for endless speaking or contracting arrangments. Big money backers, hitching his wagon to Musk, Trump etc, etc, etc.
The biggest anti-multiculturalism protest will be in the next elections. All hopes of a closer relationship with the EU will be lost because the only political choice if someone is anti-immigration is to be aligned with the far right. Danish socialists have shown that you can be anti-immigration and still be center-left in all respects. Anti-immigration is not a left-right divide, despite what politicians say. On the other hand, most British Muslims are politically conservative but do not support right wing parties because of key policies that they are against with.
Perhaps because immigration in itself is not a bad thing? Does the fact that huge swaths of the population have been brainwashed by extremist, nativist, isolationist propaganda to shift blame away from those in power/those hoarding wealth and towards poor migrants mean all political parties should shift their position to that as well? Cause that’s a pretty terrifying prospect if propaganda is to define policy baselines from now on
>Perhaps because immigration in itself is not a bad thing?
There is nothing wrong being against it, or certain types of immigration. When people talk about the benefits or drawbacks of immigration, it lacks nuance. A better immigration policy that optimises the benefits to the country should be the priority. There is no inherent right to immigrate to a country, and if someone is going to be a burden, they should not be allowed in.
Yes there is. A multitude of things. First there's the simple fact that it's a benefit to the country's economy and the personal economy of everyone who lives there if it's managed correctly.
Secondly the fact that these countries have a responsibility to take in refugees from conflicts they've caused, helped cause or benefitted from.
Taking in refugees is a responsibility per international law. Asylum is a right. Human rights are rights.
Blaming the other for all your problems is right-wing, a policy for the stupid. Self-sabotage.
> First there's the simple fact that it's a benefit to the country's economy and the personal economy of everyone who lives there if it's managed correctly.
is it really the simple fact? Do you speak based on *evidence*?
"managed correctly" does a shitton of heavy lifting here, because in the real world that's not the case anywhere.
There is evidence from Denmark, Finland, the Netherlands that immigration from places like the Middle East or the Horn of Africa is nothing short of an economically destructive black hole devouring money by the truckload.
The data from mentioned countries shows for example that the Somalis on average are leading the pack uncontested as far as consumption of welfare is considered, with total costs over the lifetime reaching ~500k-1000k dollars per person.
In what reality would millions of people from regions without halfway decent education ever be a net benefit to a developed economy where an average person spends 12+ years in schools as the baseline?
> total costs over the lifetime reaching ~500k-1000k dollars per person.
These numbers are quite spurious, and when first reported included the costs of educating children to age 18, the cost of which locally-born children also incur.
When refugees escape the first safe country to go to a G7 country, it is no longer a right. They became economic migrants. Canada accepts asylum applicants that are processed outside the country. Denmark does the same. People that leave the shores of France to get to the UK have become economic migrants, not refugees. They passed through at least 20 different safe countries before getting to France.
Regardless of where asylum seekers come from or how they arrive in the UK, they are a small proportion of all immigrants. Those arriving via small boats across the English Channel amounted to ~30,000 last year.
That these small boats are the most frequent target of activists shows that such anti-immigrant rhetoric is not based on the likely impact of immigrants once they arrive in the UK.
Completely irrelevant, there is no obligation on the part of refugees to seek asylum in the 'first safe country'. It's also hardly a surprise that the countries furthest away from currently active war zones are the first to parrot this myth.
I don't think it is any different from any other political position. I defend high taxes and progressive taxation, but there are people who defend low taxes and flat tax rates. I am against immigration and there are people who are in favour.
No, being anti-immigration is different from other political positions, like not being anti-immigration. Plus, being anti-immigration is an extremist position. Same way as having no borders is an extremist position.
Defending low taxes is different from being anti-tax.
Ok, then I just want immigration from highly skilled workers, making sure that they are not replacing local skilled workers like it happens in the US with a lot of H1B workers.
It does happen. There are many cases of entire IT departments that were replaced by Indian H1B workers, where the people being fired had to train their replacement. We are talking about someone making 150k being replaced by someone making 100k. It was very much happening before the H1B crackdown.
Skill shortage remains because of lack of investment in training and professional career paths. It is just easier to hire nurses from another country than to train them for 4 years. The US has 6 million vacancies for skilled manual workers. These positions are not covered by immigrants because most of them are unskilled or lack recognised professional certificates. The western world doesn't need more food delivery drivers. They need electricians, carpenters, plumbers, etc.
> The western world doesn't need more food delivery drivers.
But they do. People are using food delivery services, that is why they exist, and if immigrants take on those jobs because the citizens don't want to then don't blame immigrants. Blame the Doordash or Uber for creating the shitty gig industry and the people who are paying for it!
Never blame the victims of that system.
> They need electricians, carpenters, plumbers, etc.
Except when they're immigrants, then they are not needed, of course.
>Blame the Doordash or Uber for creating the shitty gig industry and the people who are paying for it!
That's why I never use their services. It is the same as people doing drugs and then complaining about drug trafficking and gang wars. All these services would disappear if they were dependant on people like myself.
How does any of what you said lead you to the conclusion that left wing parties should take a hard anti-immigration stance? “Anti-immigration” is nuanced?
Traditional left-wing parties in the 70's were against immigration because it would affect the bargaining power of workers. With the loss of influence of unions in left-wing parties, this voice has disappeared but was picked up by far right parties that saw a large number of disenfranchised working class people who were against globalisation and open immigration policies.
> Traditional left-wing parties in the 70's were against immigration because it would affect the bargaining power of workers.
And that was stupid. The main thing affecting the bargaining power of workers are the people in power.
So you agree immigrants are a good scapegoat to turn poor people against one another and shift blame away from those who actually hold power? Cause there’s no reason why immigrants should be blamed for worsening work conditions and not the employers worsening those conditions
There are good immigrants and bad immigrants. That is the reality. Low skilled immigrants will benefit mostly upper middle class by providing more affordable labour while negative impacting working class people. The doctors and engineers are mostly beneficial but they can also provide pressure on some highly skilled jobs as well as the housing market.
Immigration is not a charitable endeavour. It is designed to address gaps in the job market.
Immigration is bad but capitalist countries exploit immigration by pitting them against native citizens in a concerted effort to devalue everyone's labor.
Its the far lefts fault for making pro mass migration a core part of their identity that they can't oppose publicly without backlash. Now the far left has to embrace unchecked immigration if they want to be kept viewed as progressive.
Except it's exactly what you've described; a distracting rage baiting right wing pillar.
Proven by the fact that labour have reduced immigration more in the last year than the conservatives managed to do in 10 and nobody cares. It's never enough, never good enough. It's not "honest" because labour don't show enough hatred towards immigrants for reform voters.
Nobody will ever see any benefits from endless anti immigration policy because it doesn't create any benefits. People are so completely convinced the only issue is migration they will go the way of the us and take absurd steps to try and reduce it, spend any amount, waste 100s of billions and at the end the reward will be no improvement to people's lives and an even more deranged right wing candidate willing to go to even greater extremes.
All the while these candidates will continue to subsidize and cut taxes for the wealthy, and corporations, they don't even have to bother with an excuse for why that makes sense anymore, the people voting for them are so singularly focused on immigration.
Need more nuanced fact based takes from both sides but we're all in echo-chambers.
I would love this evidence based person to present these facts to an "evidence based" person from the other side.
And for this to become the norm.
And then finally, FINALLY, we'll get somewhere if this kind of thing keeps happening.
I wish this were true but this assumes right wing leaders, and their political framework at large, actually believe what they are saying and are arguing in good faith.
The evidence continually bears out that immigrants don't commit more crimes than average, don't claim more benefits than average. In economic studies immigration is generally found to be beneficial to the economy. None of this matters. These studies are simply thrown away as woke or part of the overall corrupt scientific establishment.
In cases where the evidence is no longer in dispute the right simply declares it never mattered anyway.
We've been shown by America that even things believed to be important pillars of belief to the right don't matter either. Less war, Epstein files, effete silicon valley tech bros controlling our minds. All of these are just dandy now, who cares, actually who ever suggested they weren't ok?
I'm honestly at a loss about how to combat this movement, or even how to get a grasp on what the core belief system is. I think it pretty much falls apart unless you account for racism and supremacy underpinning a lot of it.
> All hopes of a closer relationship with the EU will be lost because the only political choice if someone is anti-immigration is to be aligned with the far right.
If opposing immigrants is so important to you that you're voting far right then you deserve what's coming to you when the far right wins.
This didn’t start on the streets — it’s been building quietly for years.
Cost of living goes up, jobs feel tighter, public services get stretched — and people start looking for causes. Immigration becomes the easiest lens.
One group sees multiculturalism as strength, another sees it as pressure on identity and resources. Both feel unheard — and that’s where protests begin.
What we’re seeing here isn’t just anti–far right or pro–diversity — it’s a society negotiating where the balance lies.
And when that balance isn’t clear, the streets become the debate stage.
> another sees it as pressure on identity and resources. Both feel unheard
How can the anti-immigration crowd feel unheard? Their views are constantly represented.
march against the far right but also includes Hezbollah and Irgc flags. lmao such bizzare scenes.
against Western far right but not eastern far right 🤣
They can march all they want. They’ve already lost this fight. Without significant repositioning on immigration, they will continue to lose. The public has seen through the charade.
56 Comments
wojtekpolska@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
leviathan235@reddit
fredthefishlord@reddit
StopConsooming@reddit
swelboy@reddit
Ok_Instruction_2756@reddit
leto78@reddit
juanlg1@reddit
leto78@reddit
Revlar@reddit
leto78@reddit
Revlar@reddit
Vaphell@reddit
eeeking@reddit
leto78@reddit
eeeking@reddit
Osbre@reddit
fouriels@reddit
eeeking@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
leto78@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
leto78@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
leto78@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
leto78@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
leto78@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
alltheways7522@reddit
juanlg1@reddit
leto78@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
juanlg1@reddit
leto78@reddit
ShootmansNC@reddit
Etroarl55@reddit
Ok_Instruction_2756@reddit
Productivity10@reddit
bigcantonesebelly@reddit
Ok_Instruction_2756@reddit
Revlar@reddit
okabe700@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
Fearless-Feature-830@reddit
AbhishekOnPoint@reddit
Prosthemadera@reddit
Revlar@reddit
Gubbinso@reddit
berfunckle_777@reddit
Halfmoonhero@reddit
Ok_Instruction_2756@reddit
ZuluIsNumberOne@reddit
Graybeard_Shaving@reddit