Favouritism?

This guy still really concerns me. Today he comments on David Cameron's latest hot air on immigration.

What I'm really unsure about is the following. In the Book of James, chapter 2 verse 9 says "But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers." In fact, the whole passage from verse 1 through the 13 is pretty clear: Do not show favouritism.

Now, what are limits on immigration other than favouritism? Letting one person in because he has the fortune of having been born in a particular place, but refusing someone else.  Verses 2-4 say "Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in filthy old clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?"

The passage concludes with "Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment."

Now I find it really hard to understand how plucking a number out of thin air like 50,000 is consistent with this, and particularly how this imposter Cranmer can say that even that is too much. The original Cranmer of course was a Christian minister, hence ought to be reasonably well versed in the Bible, you would have thought - not just pandering to right-wing prejudices.

More fundamentally, this Cranmner always rants on about how apparently nowadays (only since 1997 though of course) all Northern cities are no-go zones, immigration has totally wrecked the fabric of our society and things are almost beyond repair - the only thing would be just to shut those doors. Is he really that unthinking? Does he really think that before 1997 all parts of Northern cities were fine and pleasant areas where you'd happily let your children go and play in?

It is human sinfulness that means that for decades many parts of our cities have been desolate places, both at the individual and corporate level, and that sure as anything isn't going to change any time soon, with or without a 50,000 cap on immigration. If anything, it will get worse if it means that the currently higher inflation remains in place (of course, the positive sides of the 2.2m influx since 1997 aren't mentioned by Cranmer) since cheap labour is no more and instead lazy Brits are mollycoddled (probably still sulking about it) into jobs. 

I grew up in Middleton, Manchester, which certainly isn't a Moss Side or Wythenshawe, or even a Werneth, but yet it had its areas where you would not sensibly go if you expected to come out without some kind of material loss. And I certainly grew up there before 1997.

Showing favouritism and shutting the doors is not a Christian response, and it certainly is not an economic response either - something I'm not even able to touch on in this post as it's already getting much too long.