|
Why do modern leftists support mass immigration of unskilled labour, a policy created by and for the ruling class in order to undercut the economic position and solidarity of the native working class?
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 11:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
The Saurus posted:Why do modern leftists support mass immigration of unskilled labour, a policy created by and for the ruling class in order to undercut the economic position and solidarity of the native working class? Do not imagine, gentlemen, that in criticizing freedom of trade we have the least intention of defending the system of protection. One may declare oneself an enemy of the constitutional regime without declaring oneself a friend of the ancient regime. Moreover, the protectionist system is nothing but a means of establishing large-scale industry in any given country, that is to say, of making it dependent upon the world market, and from the moment that dependence upon the world market is established, there is already more or less dependence upon free trade. Besides this, the protective system helps to develop free trade competition within a country. Hence we see that in countries where the bourgeoisie is beginning to make itself felt as a class, in Germany for example, it makes great efforts to obtain protective duties. They serve the bourgeoisie as weapons against feudalism and absolute government, as a means for the concentration of its own powers and for the realization of free trade within the same country. But, in general, the protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Why do modern leftists support mass immigration of unskilled labour, a policy created by and for the ruling class in order to undercut the economic position and solidarity of the native working class? If they think they have better prospects emigrating to a different country, who am I to tell someone that they have to continue to live in a lovely poor rear end country that my nation and other western nations exploited for a few hundreds years directly through imperialism and colonialism and now continues to exploit through the disproportionate power we wields in world trade? Some marxists might have beliefs about how immigration can effect the struggle for socialism. Some might see it as raising dissatisfaction amongst workers and therefore a step towards a break from the current Capitalist system. Others might see it as raising friction and conflict within the working class itself, distracting forom the economic struggle and therefore making the prospects of a socialist system coming about that much more unlikely. While I have my thoughts on the matter, I'm not confident enough about them to say "gently caress you guys, stay in your dirt poor country and suffer because I, expert marxist philosopher team overhead smash, have decided that you doing so raises the chances of a socialist revolution from 0.0001% to 0.0003%. Enjoy your lovely standard of living for the rest of your life, lol."
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Why do modern leftists support mass immigration of unskilled labour, a policy created by and for the ruling class in order to undercut the economic position and solidarity of the native working class? "low-wage immigrants are incapable of gaining class consciousness" and other racist fictions for idiots
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
My fav [neo]liberal pro-immigration talking point is how they pretend to care about the workers. 'for the same factory work, they could be making higher wages in the US! you're just keeping them in poverty!' If we actually cared about Foreign People, then there are cheaper options. We could just send foreign companies designs for our biotech facilities, or automated car factory designs and gcode, or Google/Facebook could send them their search/feed code and server farm design, etc etc. Then they could work in an identical facility and they wouldn't have to move. it'd be a huge win for foreign people, but that's not the point now is it
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
"Workers of all lands, organize along national lines to protect your jobs from foreigners!" doesn't quite have the same ring tbh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
The solution for lovely conditions in other countries is for socialist revolution there and elsewhere and international solidarity, helping to develop their countries. It's not for everyone to come and live in the developed world so they can maybe eke out a better existence under the capitalist system while totally weakening the working class and putting more and more concentrated power in the hands of the elite.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:The solution for lovely conditions in other countries is for socialist revolution there and elsewhere and international solidarity, helping to develop their countries.  Mass immigration is a safety valve that keeps capitalism functioning smoothly, (for capitalists like the narcos)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
Like I'm pretty sure the USSR gave aid to other socialist countries that were poorer than them to help their development right? They didn't just pack everyone on a plane and fly them to Russia where conditions were better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
comrade lenin points the way. this tooThe Saurus posted:Like I'm pretty sure the USSR gave aid to other socialist countries that were poorer than them to help their development right? They didn't just pack everyone on a plane and fly them to Russia where conditions were better. obviously not, and funding movements of national liberation were a high priority throughout the 20th century, but immigration in capitalist countries is a different phenomenon. see above
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Basically the argument being made ITT is that immigration is bad, because it means a reduced capacity for consumption by the white working class.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Basically the argument being made ITT is that immigration is bad, because it means a reduced capacity for consumption by the white working class. and the black working class and the hispanic working class and the asian working class and the indigenous american working class but yes let's pretend any opposition to mass immigration is because those selfish white workers don't want to share their INCREDIBLE WEALTH. They think they deserve more than $7.25 an hour? Fuckem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
Tell me more about how bad the Labor Aristocracy has it, because of Central American refugees.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Tell me more about how bad the Labor Aristocracy has it, because of Central American refugees. wow neo-lf already starting maoism third worldism arguments 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:07
|
|
|
Basically, it's not an immigrant's fault that Native Labor deradicalized, deunionized, and left itself open for the harshest acceleration of exploitation in the last 100 years. Blaming a Tamil guy with an H1B visa for your own disenfranchisement doesn't cut it, when you've never paid union dues or were even interested in organizing at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Basically, it's not an immigrant's fault that Native Labor deradicalized, deunionized, and left itself open for the harshest acceleration of exploitation in the last 100 years. Blaming a Tamil guy with an H1B visa for your own disenfranchisement doesn't cut it, when you've never paid union dues or were even interested in organizing at all. Literally the same sentiment as: "The poor and lowly are a creeping pestilence - there are no innocent ones, and the downtrodden are the justly damned - sinners in a hell they've made"
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:Literally the same sentiment as: I'm just describing the reality of the historical development. Proletarian class consciousness was destroyed, more often than not with the help of the "Native" working class of the First World. Native workers are only vulnerable to migrationary pressures in the first place because they gave up their bargaining power, political power, and strike power. If immigration was strictly limited then labor would be offshored to the Third World. Capital is more fluid and powerful than it ever has been in history while Labor is at its weakest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:If immigration was strictly limited then labor would be offshored to the Third World. Capital is more fluid and powerful than it ever has been in history while Labor is at its weakest. All the labour that can be offshored already is being, not every job can be offshored, the immigrants are brought in to drive down wages and conditions for those jobs which can't be offshored. Combining protectionism to ensure domestic manufacturing while blocking unskilled immigration is the best policy for labour. I also like how you blame the workers themselves for their situation, as though there wasn't a huge effort by the rich and the powerful to weaken them in the past decades, including through the policy of mass immigration and shipping real jobs overseas. Pretty sure the workers weren't yelling for those policies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:not every job can be offshored This is a matter of time, technology, and priorities, not an immutable law.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Bro Dad posted:wow neo-lf already starting maoism third worldism arguments i don't think anyone itt is a third worldist and labor aristocracy isn't an inherently mtw term
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Zombies' Downfall posted:This is a matter of time, technology, and priorities, not an immutable law. Regardless, it's totally inaccurate to say that without illegal immgration literally every job the illegal immigrants are doing will be shipped overseas instead, especially if it's paird with a sensible tariffs policy
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:I also like how you blame the workers themselves for their situation, as though there wasn't a huge effort by the rich and the powerful to weaken them in the past decades. i blame the concerted, targeted power of the capitalist class in smothering all vanguard parties in the womb, and the imperial bourgeoisie for jiu-jitsuing their way through the 20th century without getting deposed. a worker's movement in the united states is going to have black and brown faces and will in all likelihood be a mostly black and brown movement. white settlers of all classes have a predisposition to being reactionary and that's a hard hurdle to clear. but it is possible to do it
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
The Saurus posted:I also like how you blame the workers themselves for their situation, as though there wasn't a huge effort by the rich and the powerful to weaken them in the past decades, including through the policy of mass immigration and shipping real jobs overseas. Pretty sure the workers weren't yelling for those policies. For every 1 wobbly there were at least 2 running dogs. I'm not the one who is denying agency to the nativists for exacerbating artificial divisions of race and ethnicity. Denying the cultural forces which perpetuate Nativism and pinning all of the blame on the rich is missing the forest for the trees. The Labor Aristocracy had a lot to gain by making a compact with Capital, and now that their labor is made redundant through globalization suddenly they're left holding their own dicks and wondering what happened. Well what happened was the development of Capital beyond the ability of Labor to control and influence, not the influx of relatively powerless immigrants. You can blame these developments on propaganda and other various forms of manipulation all you like, but at the end of the day it's the American Settler who actively chooses to resist class consciousness in favor of reactionary Nationalisms and Racialisms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
If th United States fell to Communism and stopped exploiting and making war in the Third World I'm not sure why widespread economic/political immigration to the United States would continue. So many migrants are already refugees or asylum-seekers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
Lol "labor aristocracy"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Lol "labor aristocracy" laugh it up, person who is apparently smarter than lenin
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:Lol "labor aristocracy" The only reason you were even able to make this post is because of the excessive profits extracted from 3rd World laborers, who mined and shipped the minerals and semiconductors your computer was made with. If those laborers were paid at parity with laborers of the First World, then your doodads wouldn't be nearly as affordable and you wouldn't be able to enjoy a much higher standard of living based on Superprofits. That is not like, your fault or anything, but that is the reality of the class relation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:The only reason you were even able to make this post is because of the excessive profits extracted from 3rd World laborers, who mined and shipped the minerals and semiconductors your computer was made with. If those laborers were paid at parity with laborers of the First World, then your doodads wouldn't be nearly as affordable and you wouldn't be able to enjoy a much higher standard of living based on Superprofits. The conditions were probably worse in the assembly than in the mining or refinement. But either way it's not my problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:The conditions were probably worse in the assembly than in the mining or refinement. But either way it's not my problem. Because the assembly was done in China.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 07:41
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:That is not like, your fault or anything, but that is the reality of the class relation. So loving what? Why even bring it up except to guilt trip white/western people for their standard of living and for complaining about income inequality in their own countries? You're like someone during jim crow telling a white worker they can't be pissed at their treatment because black people have it worse. And maybe look up the concept of purchasing power parity once in a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Actually the point is precisely not to feel guilty for enjoying the superprofits of imperialism, or to Feel Bad about things while agitating for a bigger share of the imperialist pie. Instead the point is to act in solidarity with the workers of the world, and unite with them, rather than laughing off the suggestion that an aristocracy of labor could exist (and, even worse, concluding that even if it did it's "not my problem" -- that's literally the fast track to fascism).
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Jewel Repetition posted:The conditions were probably worse in the assembly than in the mining or refinement. But either way it's not my problem. yeah let's all base our politics around the philosophy of "it's not my problem", that will end up well. Thank you to forum brain trust Jewel Repetition for this amazing idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:Actually the point is precisely not to feel guilty for enjoying the superprofits of imperialism, or to Feel Bad about things while agitating for a bigger share of the imperialist pie. Instead the point is to act in solidarity with the workers of the world, and unite with them This is exactly what I want to do. The point is that mass immigration from the developing to the developed world benefits no one except the elite. Solidarity is about helping our comrades all over the world, not just the ones who got the chance of living as an underclass in the West. Mass immigration makes solidarity less likely, not more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Your analysis treats mass migration as exogenous rather than endogenous.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Basically the "it's not my problem" mentality is precisely why the Labor Aristocracy is bad, and serves as a buffer against revolutionary change. Guys like Jewel Repetition are a part of the problem, and they have to be able to recognize that if there's any chance for positive change. At least before the Maoist 3rd Worldist hordes conquer Amerikkka and send all our white asses to the labor camps.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
This thread is like a time capsule back to lf circa 2010. i enjoyed reading it a lot (unironically.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
"It's not my problem" is basically "gently caress you, got mine" and is at the heart of nearly all bad politics. Like, just restricting the scope of analysis to US domestic policy, the primary rhetorical obstacle to things like universal healthcare and tuition-free public college and welfare generally is the sentiment that other peoples' misfortunes and disadvantages "aren't my problem."
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Illegal immigrants are basically Scabs but on a national level
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
That's not how scabs work.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:12 |
|
|
The Saurus posted:Illegal immigrants are basically Scabs but on a national level What difference does documentation make to whether or not an immigrant would somehow be a "scab?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 22:57
|
|