At a minimum I demand we all be as free to move around the world as the products, money and material that our labor creates.
it’s baffling to me how the idea that “being born here does not make me entitled to services more than someone who wasn’t born here” is controversial among “leftists”
we all need food, we all need housing… why should it matter that my birth coordinates happen to be within an arbitrary drawing on the map ffs
is controversial among “leftists”
I haven’t noticed any leftists who consider that idea controversial. Mostly just Liberals/Democrats
Many state communists oppose open borders. The USSR, China, and Cuba all had/have citizenship privileges and controlled migration, and generally people that support those governments are also called “leftist”.
The same goes for many social democrats and socialist reformists. Even unionists often oppose migration because migrants are imported by the capitalist order to use as scabs (see “guest workers” in 1970s West Germany).
All basically want a walled garden in which leftist ways of living can flourish, usually with the idea to export them later.
But especially in activist and discourse spaces, people tend to be in a pretty narrow band from pop liberalism to anarchocommunism. Socialists, socdems, and unionists tend to be busy with their job, because that is what their praxis calls for. And state communists tend to walk away exasperated when people condemn genocide.
But anarchocommunist praxis is for a large part prefigurative sharing of information, ideas, and tentative structures. So we’re relatively loud and as unemployed as we can get away with.
Many state communists oppose open borders. The USSR, China, and Cuba all had/have citizenship privileges and controlled migration,
Fair enough, the USSR restricted movement within their territory more than many other countries restricted their borders.
I think what you’re seeing is that there are two groups of people interpreting it in two different ways:
- Change this one thing and everyone will be better off for it.
- An ideal world would have this feature.
Removed by mod
The convenient thing is that “Abolish ICE” is valid whether you want closed borders, open borders, or no borders.
The main predecessor to ICE was Immigration and Naturalization Service. Notice the difference in tone between Service and Enforcement? But even if you don’t don’t support immigration, ICE has morphed into a paramilitary secret police to do Trump’s bidding and has been attacking and deporting natural born citizens. If you only oppose “illegal” immigration, ICE has been targeting and deporting deporting people with all their paperwork in order.
Literally the only two reasons to support keeping ICE is that you support fascism and/or White Supremacy
It’s valid to the majority but to those in power it’s a non starter.
I wasn’t saying open borders before, but I am now. Picking primary candidates who support it too. We need the EU model. Fuck whatever broken system we have now.
European here. You do realize that the EU is still quite picky about who gets in, right?
Within the EU itself it’s very easy to move around, I can drive through several countries without seeing a single border checkpoint. Actually getting into the EU if you’re from a “less desirable” nation? I hear it’s not all that easy.
The EU is notorious for its brutal and heavy-handed immigration enforcement. This is one rare case where the answer is in the past; America didn’t even have laws restricting immigration for about a hundred years.
We do have the EU model. Travel all you want across US state borders. Europe and America both enforce outer borders.
The system in the US is indeed broken, as is Europe in slightly different ways.
Sounds like a bit of an opposame risk, walking problem-reaction-solutioned straight into NAU. Great grandest father mason would be proud.
I vote for no borders.
Conservatives need an enemy to rally against. That is all they have.
They have many other enemies. But having an enemy is required for the ideology.
Any ideology that is enemy based, eventually leads to genocide.
and once they’ve eliminated that enemy they need a new enemy to eliminate
Removed by mod
Don’t let perfection be the enemy of progress. We can move toward inevitable or destructive. I choose logically-forward, personally. Doesn’t matter my personal opinions
The moderate position is stop giving money to the gestapo. The people who want to give them money do not represent progress.
Yes, Open borders is the desirable outcome. The fact that people were saying they don’t want open borders shows they’re a lib and therefore not a real leftist.
It is not immigrants who are the cause of any problems in America, it is the right-fascists and oligarchs who shit this garbage out their mouths.
The counter to right-wing extremism isn’t right-wing liberalism, it is real leftism, the thing they are trying to dismiss.
The leeches are not the immigrants, unless they happen to be an oligarch immigrant like Elon.
It’s true. Before March 3rd 2003, the day ICE was created, humanity did not know borders. They weren’t a thing. Borders have only been a concept for 23 years, the same amount of time ICE has existed.
I really wish I could just know this is sarcasm.
Yes, my fault for neglecting the /s
I’m saying spaceships for everybody.
The US immigration “policy” is just as stupid as it is inhumane. At this point it’s easier to imagine it being orchestrated by rivals that think long term, rather than being just from the ever-present conservative hate and ignorance.
Our economy is built with an infinite growth mindset, moreso than most. ALL developed nations are seeing population growth slow down and even reverse – that’s just what happens when populations get educated and wealthy.
So what are we doing? Violently kicking out tons of lower paid workers while also scaring away some of the most highly educated and specialized Ph.Ds.
But hey, at least we’re consistent and also make conditions horrible for natural born citizens to raise USian children!
Removed by mod
I mean, I’m fairly liberal with immigration but I literally do not understand how it would even be possible to have completely open borders.
What happens when 100 million people try to immigrate in less than ten years? Where would they live? Where would their children go to school?
Where would they live?
In houses.
Where would their children go to school?
In schools.
Historically speaking passports and border controls have been the exception, not the rule. The reason you can’t conceive of it possibly working is you’ve only ever lived in a world where you need a passport to go somewhere.
The scenario of 100 million people suddenly arriving is FUD. Apart from not being likely even on purely logistical grounds, the questions you’re asking are ones that are eminently answerable: Where do they live? In houses that they build. Where would their children go to school? At schools that they build and staff. It’s from the same fearmongering stable as “theytookerrrjaawwwbs”.
When Germany reunified about 2 million people (about 10% of the population) moved west. This is for a situation where they spoke the same language, had mostly the same shared traditions and culture , visiting family was a short car ride away and West Germany offered all the social services and workers rights one expects.
In what world would 100 million people abandon their whole lives to move to the US where they might not speak the language or understand the culture, to get bankrupt by a cold, having your kids killed in schools and working 51 weeks of the year?
Canada had an annual immigration rate of 1.4 million per year and the population is 40 million and that’s still with a limited non-open door policy, and it was way too much which Canada realized and started to restrict it, which would be the equivalent of America bringing in 14 million a year.
I absolutely wouldn’t be surprised if 100 mil wanted to immigrate to America over ten years if there was an open door policy.
deleted by creator
They would live at Amazon Warehouses and the kids would be in the mines.
