5
6

Thoughts on open boarders? (self.socialism)

Reddit_Dictator が 投稿

I've seen a lot of criticism of open boarders and/or "free" (keep in minds not necessarily fair) trade as having negative effects for local workers. I've always felt that workers local and abroad need to be protected.

Just rambling. Thoughts?

全 23 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]s1gmoidreformist communist 18ポイント19ポイント  (4子コメント)

You have to view this question in its complexity.

I personally welcome actual political union, as it enables class identity to slowly supplant national identity, and results in a larger, more mobile working class. A Socialist transition "in Europe" or "in the US" would have a far greater chance of continued success than one "in Bosnia-Herzegovina" or "in Oklahoma". :)

The idea of having to protect "domestic workers" from the mythical, demonized migrant lumpenproletariat is not Socialist. It's Racist. There should be no "American Proletariat" or "Mexican Prolerariat", and more than that, there should be no conflict between the two. There is only the Proletariat, which is at conflict with the capitalist class - both in the US and in Mexico.

However, when we look at most "open border" and "free trade" pacts, they open doors for capital, but leave them closed for the proletariat. More often than not, they close doors for the proletariat of poorer countries, in exchange for the doors opened for capital.

I remember reading a Socialist thinker about "freedom of movement". Capital is free to go to Sierra Leone, and mine diamonds at slave labor wages (or through actual slave labor), but Sierra Leonean workers are not free to go to London to work at London wages. This is the main problem.

[–]Reddit_Dictator[S] 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

The idea of having to protect "domestic workers" from the mythical, demonized migrant lumpenproletariat is not Socialist. It's Racist. There should be no "American Proletariat" or "Mexican Prolerariat", and more than that, there should be no conflict between the two. There is only the Proletariat, which is at conflict with the capitalist class - both in the US and in Mexico.

Ultimately I agree with you but workers do face extortion of either accepting lower wages/working conditions or face the threat of capital taking the jobs elsewhere. Until we can protect those workers adequately I don't think it's fair to simplify it down to racism because workers still have to compete with each other.

I have no idea how automation plays into all of this however.

[–]ChaosTerranAnarchist Communist 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's a problem with neoliberal economics though and has nothing to do with socialism.

Real wages have remained stagnant for the last 40 years, because this whole economic system is one collective race to the bottom, with or without open borders.

This issue simply exposes the inherent exploitative nature of capitalism even more.

Workers have faced this problem ever since neoliberalism really took off in the 1970s, with many jobs being "outsourced" to third world countries so multinational corporations could exploit cheaper labour. This is nothing new, this was never a sustainable model, as it was and still is all about short term profit.

Mass migration waves are merely a natural consequence of the exploitative and imperialist nature of this system. Period.

The question here isn't wether or not you are eventually going to lose your job, the only real question is "when".

[–]s1gmoidreformist communist 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well... that makes me think of an imaginary parable.

Let's say there's a slave-holding fantasy country. There are mine slaves, whose lives are miserable and short, and domestic slaves, who are still slaves, get whipped and abused, but at least they can sleep under actual roofs, eat actual food, and aren't worked to death.

Let's posit that the slaves are on the verge of revolt after centuries of oppression. So the ruling council brings an edict that allows well-behaved mine slaves to become domestic slaves... Which makes sense too, because the mines are running dry, and there is plenty of work in the city workshops. And true enough, suddenly domestic slaves are faced with an influx of uncultured, sturdy ex-mine slaves, who are absolutely grateful for being allowed even half of the meager privileges that domestic slaves enjoy.

So... suddenly, the anger of domestic slaves turns away from the masters, toward the mine slaves who are imposing on their turf and diluting their privileges. The masters are happy and the slave-holding empire thrives for another century.

[–]AgletsHowDoTheyWork 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I remember reading a Socialist thinker about "freedom of movement".

That really makes sense. Any memory of where I could find that piece?

[–]Ienpw_IIIResist 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Confining people by accident of birth to their western-delineated, western-imposed state system? Not okay.

[–]eLyUKayEeAnarchist 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Necessary part of Civ to win the game.

Gaming jokes aside, allowing free movement is a key part of allowing people to prosper. Don't like the corrupt Mexican government? Move to the slightly less corrupt US. Don't like the US? Move to Canada.

[–]UpholderOfThoughtsMao 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

Obviously for it. I support the proletariat, not just the white proletariat.

[–]Your_Post_Is_MetalBurn it down, build it again 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

I think it's worth discussing. My only problem with illegal immigration is that it encourages employers to abuse said immigrants. Because they aren't legal, they have little or no recourse. It should be easy to move freely between nations, and there should be systems in place to protect migrant workers. I can go to Home Depot right now and pick up some guys, pay them below minimum wage, provide them with no safety gear, and if one gets hurt I can just tell him to fuck off because he's not here legally. Regardless of how you feel about his being here in the first place, that isn't right.

Obviously, if you have global socialism, this is sort of a moot point. Workers should move freely without worries about wages or dramatic changes to quality of life. They should also be able to take part in the political systems of the places they move to. I honestly don't care if illegals want to vote, for example. They're just as effected by changes in the political climate as I am, and potentially even more so.

[–]AManWhoPlaysGuitarAnarchist 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

immigration being illegal also makes crossing the border a dangerous proposition, and legitimizes militarizing the border.

[–]A_Pfannkuchen_Kraterleftcom 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Workers need to protect themselves, but not from immigration or the global transfer of goods, but from a capitalist system of nation states which makes those things harmful to them in the first place. Just think about it: Why would anyone in an highly industrialized and technologically developed area have problems with immigrants moving there? With them, you have more workers to meet human needs, and you have the means to give them housing and education and have them help produce those goods and services.

As for global transfer of goods - communism can only be achieved by a technologically developed society that has as much means of production as possible (calculated against the need for environmental protection and other factors, of course). For that, you need a worldwide, planned and integrated system of production, that enables the use of all available resources on Earth. "Borders" and "nations" (nation states) would make this impossible.

Tl;DR No nation, no border, fight law and order!

[–][削除されました]  (13子コメント)

[deleted]

    [–]UpholderOfThoughtsMao 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

    You would fit right in with some folks from the BNP lol.

    [–][削除されました]  (1子コメント)

    [deleted]

      [–]BjornIronsideGulags are for liberals 2ポイント3ポイント  (9子コメント)

      Why the fuck arent you banned yet. /u/vidurnaktis, you told me SLS wasnt necessary because yall are cleaning up the liberals? Can you please get rid of this reactionary pig?

      [–]vidurnaktisMarxism-Luxemburgism[M] -1ポイント0ポイント  (8子コメント)

      One, please don't put words in my mouth I never said SLS wasn't necessary, I asked for patience while we get things sorted. Two, don't bring drama here from other subs. Three, they've been banned because they broke the rules this time, so long as someone stays within the rules they can comment and post here.

      [–]BjornIronsideGulags are for liberals -1ポイント0ポイント  (7子コメント)

      So you were lying when you said you were trying to clean up the liberalism? Because it has only gotten a lot worse.

      [–]vidurnaktisMarxism-Luxemburgism[M] -1ポイント0ポイント  (6子コメント)

      Worse? How does that even follow? The liberals who break rules are banned which has done a lot to clean up the filth that was left over. You don't attack the folks who want to learn, you attack the ones who shove, or try to, liberal ideology down our members' throats.

      We've accomplished a lot, actually and we're only going to accomplish more.

      [–]BjornIronsideGulags are for liberals 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

      Again, just being a liberal shit apparently doesnt break the rules. Is supporting Sanders not apologism for genocide? So why dont you ban Sanders applogists?

      [–]vidurnaktisMarxism-Luxemburgism -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

      If they actively promote Sanders genocide they are banned. But if they just say they support Sanders and are open to learning, why ban them?

      [–]BjornIronsideGulags are for liberals -1ポイント0ポイント  (3子コメント)

      What about those not willing to learn? What about all the fucks saying "but but but Sanders is the best we have!!!"

      You have really low standards for "trying to learn"

      [–]vidurnaktisMarxism-Luxemburgism -2ポイント-1ポイント  (2子コメント)

      If they openly advocate for anything against the rules they are banned. This is a sub of 50k, the problems are not going to be solved overnight.

      [–]BjornIronsideGulags are for liberals -2ポイント-1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      So is Sanders apologia against the rules?