UKIP strategy to muster a 'people's army' against non selective immigration is so familiar - how has it managed to circumvent its predecessors' neo-fascist and neo-Nazi connotations?
Current UKIP discourse should be viewed as a continuation of the strategies of fascist groups in UK history
Class was never a homogeneous category in Marxist thought, some of the earliest works of which were sensitive to the influence of race and nationalism.
From the Kindertransport of the 1930s to the resettlement of Syrian refugees today, British immigration policy has been subject to an ongoing struggle over British national identity, pitting idealised notions of liberal ‘British values’ against competing pressures to exclude and discriminate.
The ‘racialisation’ of class in Britain has been a consequence of the weakening of ‘class’ as a political idea since the 1970s – it is a new construction, not an historic one.
We should not talk about immigrants being 'illegal'.
Politicians target immigrants while capital and de-regulated market forces seem beyond their reach, leading to policing of borders and peoples and producing a bipolar regime targeting people on the basis of race and class.
Having voices and stories of migrants at the centre of debates on immigration leads to more nuanced narratives.
The image of the 'bogus' asylum seeker, here only to reap economic benefits, is often presented by the media. When you hear from asylum seekers themselves you find that the reality is very different.
When people are no longer in control of their own lives, they can resist by mastering their own deaths. In 2012 the hunger strike was deployed as a mode of resistance among migrants in Danish asylum camps and a political prisoner in Bahrain; the Danish media reacted in interesting ways.