He (Kier Starmer) made a statement about the current “crisis” in the Channel, attacking the government for not reducing the number of people trying to make the journey, and criticising cuts to international aid and Priti Patel’s inability to secure a “strong” agreement with France to stop people making this journey.
Two days later, the shadow home secretary, Nick Thomas-Symonds, was repeating much the same messages on the Sunday morning TV rounds.
The government is suggesting that people seeking asylum belong elsewhere. In response Labour is opposing some of the most draconian proposals, but isn’t disagreeing with the premise of the overall approach.
Because it wants to win votes to get itself into power.
Presumably, Labour is trying to appear “sensible” and say what it thinks the electorate wants to hear.
Trust me, Maya, outside of your tiny, totally unrepresentative circle, it is what the voters want to hear"
There are alternatives, and Labour should promote those instead.
The prison scholar Ruth Wilson Gilmore encourages us to think of reforms that would open up an avenue to transform the world altogether, rather than just tweak the current system.
People who want to 'transform the world' are often lunatics and would-be genocidal despots. I don't fancy her chances much.
But give me an example of where her ravings might be relevant here?
Here, that means creating a world where everyone has both the right to move and the right to stay.
Ha ha ha ha! You're just another Open Borders dreamer. No thanks.