Exh migration leftyy

 If I don’t sound as strongly pro migrant (even though I am Left wing on migration), its only because since I am generally against Capitalism I realize the negative effects Capitalism has on legal and illegal migrants. 


For example I realize that mass illegal migration and overwhelming/endless legal migration (the type of migration where can barely afford to take care of our own people let alone overwhelming/endless migrants) is beneficial to the capitalist class and thus that makes me feel that mass illegal migration and overwhelming/endless legal migration is effectively a net negative in my eyes. Many migrants come in and take jobs away from citizens which increases unemployment


When migration that happens within a capitalist countries (like the US) sadly it can be seen as a modern day version of bondage (like in the Old South) 


Back then, there was colonialist exploitation happening within a capitalist country via bondage due to similar conditions to today.  


Today via mass illegal migration and overwhelming/endless legal migration, legal migrants and illegal migrants sadly end up working below minimum wage or barely minimum wage in a subsistence type existence (like construction work of migrants in some parts of the US for example) within a capitalist country not too much better or different than the type of dehumanizing capitalist worker exploitation that slaves were put through in the Old South. 


A lesser but still relevant reason I don’t sound strongly pro migrant (even though I am Left wing on migration), is because I see the negative effect of migration in that migration is used to undercut wages and that migration can be detrimental to the entire working class (though we should gladly share what we make with foreigners specially if they’re in need) . The US needs to stop monopolizing our job market


Ideally, migration should be designed around the economic interests of the American people and especially Americans at the bottom of the labor market . 


A study of the struggle waged by the American working class reveals that, in order to oppose their workers, the employers either bring in workers from abroad or else transfer manufacture to countries where there is a cheap labor force.


But the Left need not take my word for it. Just ask Karl Marx, whose position on immigration would get him banished from the modern Left. Although migration at today’s speed and scale would have been unthinkable in Marx’s time, he expressed a highly critical view of the effects of the migration that occurred in the nineteenth century. In a letter to two of his American fellow-travelers, Marx argued that the importation of low-paid Irish immigrants to England forced them into hostile competition with English workers. He saw it as part of a system of exploitation, which divided the working class and which represented an extension of the colonial system. He wrote this piece” Andrea Nagle A Left Case Against Open borders

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Exh demwmw

Saying that Joe Biden is better choice for the left wing than DJT instead of saying they are equally bad choices for the left wing, is excessive centrism and condemnable  Republicans take 10 steps backwards, Democrats take 1 step forward. Liberal 2.0ers call that progress. Leftists like me call it a f*cking disgrace. A lot of things that the Democrats campaign on and take credit for, were by and large grassroots campaigns by progressive groups. For example, the DNC really fought a lot of state-wide decriminalization attempts, that's why the first legalized states had to use voter referendums. Then you got issues like abortion and gay marriage, which were undone by the courts and NEVER codified into law by the Democrats, despite having many opportunities to do so. The DNC are NOT allies to us leftists, they are dangerous. Perhaps the Democrats are more dangerous than the GOP, since the Democrats take up the space of a left party, while they ignore grassroots leftist organizing and g
Read more

Exh bizaroousay

(from  Wikipedia ): "Despite their differences, Bizarro and Superman have teamed up on occasion. One notable example happened in Superman #379, when a strange creature appeared to be devouring Bizarros. Fearing he would end up alone Bizarro tried to steal Superman's duplicator ray. Superman convinced Bizarro he would be better off trying to stop the monster before making any more Bizarros.  The creature eventually devoured Bizarro, but Superman soon figured out that the creature was not trying to kill the Bizarros, but using their combined strength to defeat another creature which was trying to destroy htraE. The first creature was created as part of a plan developed by none other than the Bizarro Lex Luthor, who Bizarro referred to as a "punk hero." "In the imaginary story, Superman: Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow?, which served as an ending to Silver Age Superman continuity, Bizarro #1 (the original Bizarro and the world's leader/greatest hero),
Read more

Exh libfemdfni

from here There is a practical component to all of this. The question of humanism vs antihumanism is the question upon which the debate between liberal feminism and nihilist gender abolitionism will be based. The liberal feminist says “I am a woman” and by that means that they are spiritually, ontologically, metaphysically, genetically, or any other modes of “essentially” a woman. The gender nihilist says “I am a woman” and means that they are located within a certain position in a matrix of power which constitutes them as such. The liberal feminist is not aware of the ways power creates gender, and thus clings to gender as a means of legitimizing themselves in the eyes of power. They rely on trying to use various systems of knowledge (genetic sciences, metaphysical claims about the soul, kantian ontology) in order to prove to power they can operate within it. The gender nihilist, the gender abolitionist, looks at the system of gender itself and see’s the violence at its core. We say n
Read more