Because it serves only to mitigate the effects of the racist system known as globalisation. Western companies set up in the 'developing' world, pay no local tax, export/sell to the 'developed' world. Destroying any local industry in the process.
The results are tragic stories on a human level but to support/facilitate and campaign for mass immigration is racist- thev way forward is to campaign for localisation and support for local economies.

@anon
I find it very hard to understand your argument. You say that "support for mass immigration is racist" but you do not justify this statement. In fact in your next sentence you say that this support "seves to mitigate the effects of the racist system known as globalisation" which would seem to suggest that it is anti-racist! You offer no evidence to support your claim that support for mass immigration is racist.

All of which is irrelevant to this demonstration which was not in "support of mass immigration" but a protest against the detention of migrants. Freedom of movement only leads to mass migration where there are are large disparities of global wealth. Indeed freeing people's ability to move to another country may serve to redistribute wealth to some extent.

In other words, supporting free movement is one element of the struggle for global equality and against a racist neo-liberal world order. Opposing "mass immigration" (in the global north) is an attempt to entrench global inequalities and maintain a white European racist system.

'Mitigate' as in makes easier to accept/live with. Globalisation is racist because it is a system dominated by white skinned people which exploits dark skinned people. Movement of peoples can not lead to equality as it works against any form of localisation. Anti-racists should campaign for investment in the economy and infra-structure of places like West Africa where the economy has collapsed because of Globalisation.

The problem with your argument is that it ignores the unpleasant realities of the world economy *now*, as opposed to in some rose-tinted future where everyone is happy in their perfect local communities. Massive economic and social inequalities exist, enforced by national and supranational borders. For people living outside the sanctified global north, life is made unbearable by poverty, wars for resources and exploitation. As a result many who can risk everything by trying to leave in search of the lesser evil of living in the global north. In your contorted anti-racist movement it seems that we should send them all back to struggle in their local communities (or maybe lock them all up in places like Morton Hall?)

Apart from the obvious libertarian arguments against such police state policies, this system isn't working anyway. Although life is being made harder and harder for migrants to this and other rich countries, they still come and they still manage to make lives for themselves here. Migration is inevitable whilst geographical inequality exists. Trying to support it or defeat it makes only a minor quantitiative difference.

My position is that, whilst people still choose to migrate here, we should welcome them rather than repressing them or turning a blind eye to that repression. If they need to make a home in our communities then we should help them put down roots so that they can feel local whilst also bringing the benefit of their experiences from their first home. People all around the world hate the global capitalist system - this is a great opportunity for us to learn from struggles in other places.

Mass immigration plays into the hands of Global Capital not until it is confronted will investment be made in local economies. Helping out individuals is one thing but promoting a policy and doctrine of mass immigration is pro-capitalist, pro-exploitation and racist.