Do You Agree with CPGB(ML) Party Programme on Immigration?

I am an immigrant to UK and agree that immigration is a requirement for the capitalist to exploit workers from weaker countries to work at lower wages in comparison to local. workers.  That said, it is very difficult to understand the CPGB(ML) party programme statement that calls for “abolition of all border controls, as part of the wider fight to uproot racism from the working-class movement and build unity among workers in Britain, so strengthening the fight for communism.

I agree that immigration is a two-way sword in capitalist hand – on one side they exploit workers with lower wages, while on other side, they spilt workers by playing patriotic/racist card. But it is very difficult to understand how CPGB(ML) can call for abolition of all border controls. I am sure that is not followed in any of existing communist countires. In fact wherever the communists are/were in power, the boarders were more strenghened 😉

Per me in future world, international boarders have no relevance; but that cannot be said for current times. If CPGB-ML comes to power (most unlikely at least for next few years!) can party take decision to abolish boarder control? 99% the answer is No! Given this, how can the party call for something that CPGB-ML itself will not be able to comply theoretically and practically?


Bombardier scenario – Is “British-job-for-British-Workers” the right attitute to be followed by a Communist Party?

Few weeks ago, UK government backed Siemens over Bombardier (UK based train factory in Derby) as its preferred bidder to build new train carriages for Thameslink route.  As a result, it is almost certain that a number of Bombardier employees will be made redundant.

 There is no doubt that workers at Bombardier are devastated, and their anger against Government is understandable and I sincerely feel sorry for those affected. 

That said, I am unable to support the remarks by workers, unions and Communist Party of Britain (CPB) on tune of “British jobs for British Workers”.   While the anger and frustration of workers and unions are understandable, the statement from CPB is more suitable for BNP to advocate – and not for a respectable communist party. 

It is precisely these sorts of statements that move workers away from progressive proletarian movements and drive them towards fascist national parties with narrow minds. Instead, it is the role of the Communist parties to educate workers that the working class faces the same issues, wherever they are on the globe. 

Statements like “British jobs for British workers” will only help fascist and far-right parties to justify their hidden agenda; these ways of thinking will make workers fight against their colleagues who are of a different colour, nationality, race or religion.  This is exactly what the anti-worker parties and fascist organisations aspire for.  They want to split the workers and make them weak by divide-and-rule.  Only a strong, united worker force could stand tall and demand for their rights.  Any split among workers will ultimately be a disadvantage only for the worker’s overall movement .

 I don’t know why Bombardier lost the project and it is not my intension to explore further on that in this post.  Whatever be the reason, “anti-British-worker-attitude” of Government seems to be the last reason.  Will bad-mouthing Siemens / Government or international workers bring this project back to UK? Not at all!  Instead, the trade unions should ask questions in tune of “Why Bombardier lost this project?  What were the reasons behind it?  What else need to be done by the management to prevent this in future”.   These questions shoule be directed to Bombardier managemenet, bid response team, and Government too, may be.

 Am I the only person who feels CPB statement sounds more like that from BNP?  What do you think?