How do you respond to this post from /r/neoliberal in reference to Bernie Sanders calling open borders a Koch brothers...

How do you respond to this post from /r/neoliberal in reference to Bernie Sanders calling open borders a Koch brothers proposal.

Are these radical centrists morally superior to you, leftypol?

Other urls found in this thread:

jacobinmag.com/2016/04/chait-neoliberal-new-inquiry-democrats-socialism/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

What could they say to that?

Tell them to google "brain drain"
The few college/university educated people that poor sub-saharan countries put out go western countries
And there's a way bigger resource/money flow from poor countries to rich ones than the other way around

I'm all for open borders, as long as it includes free movement and certification for all skilled labor (i.e. doctors and lawyers.)

poorer countries have raw materials within their borders that we need and will still need once a socdem or further left government comes into power. currently, what happens is that their governments give the profits to companies owned by people from our countries. those people exploit their workers. were we to get in charge, we'd allow those countries to take control over the resources that are rightfully theirs, allowing them to give their workers and general citizenry a decent life.

moreover, by casting aside the capitalist tendency to spend a ton of resources on things that most certainly don't matter like advertising, "more advanced" razors, infomercial products, et cetera, we'll be able to steadily become more and more efficient and make goods less and less scarce, meaning we'll be able to just give them to poorer countries

simple as that

Free movement of people dosen't elivate poverty at all. The number born into poverty will always be far higher than the number able to emmigrate to wealthier nations

You mean like how sweatshops in the third world creates wealth in the west? those people are only going to "stay poor" as long as capitalist exploitation continues in third world countries.
Neoliberals are the ones responsible for setting up this system and now they're shaming people who have a problem with it.

alleviate*

...

Neoliberals
Also neoliberals.

Hmmm.

The only ones that would benefit from open borders are the economic elites, it would depress the wages of the middle and working classes while capital owners would reap the benefits of a huge single market.

You can forget about any kind of revolution when the people a too concerned with surviving to stand up for their rights.

Basically Bernie is completely right.

I was waiting for this tbh.

SOMEHOW A GOOD THING!

What if you call their bluff and say you don't care? Think about it. Elite liberals have no real material strength. They do not control the military and are repellent to gun owners. They have no power among the people, but make do only with money. They have no charisma and are impossible to get along with.

The only reason they have hanged on for so long is because of moralizing. When it comes to moralizing, nothing can match the liberal culture apparatus. But morals, as we all know, are spooks. Show that you have become immune to their mind viruses/spooks, and watch as the witch melts before you.

This is what the alt right has done. They have declared themselves immune to the liberal's favored spooks, and what have the liberals been able to do to them? Nothing. The only reason the frog cultists are slowing down right now is because they are fucking jokes, not because the liberals have been able to counter their rhetoric.

Neoliberals support mass immigration because it provides cheap slave labor and depresses wages of the working class natives keeping everyone poor.
It also provides more consumers.
A neoliberal is someone scared that trump will deport their maid and they might have to raise their own kids for once.
A neo liberal is someone who lives in an white gated community and tells you to celebrate diversity.

I would that say that we should only let in violent, criminal, thuggish scum that claim to be refugees because they aren't profitable and that's good because profit is for capitalists and is also evil in the non-moral way as well because spooks.

A neo-liberal is 95% of people because anything and everything that isn't subcultural nerd politics is neo-liberal.

False. Classic soc dem politics isn't exactly subcultural nerd politics.

I think technology is going to kill neoliberlism.

It relays on being the smartest guy in the room, being the "Adult".
But you cant be that when trump is trolling the fuck out of you and making you tear your hair out and commies are calling out what a classist shit you are in your twitter mentions

I've heard they're neo-liberals as well, like everything. The orginal meaning of neo-liberal was social democratic economics.

Ah yes Milton Friedman and the Chicago School at large were well known for their advocacy of social democracy.

Neo liberals defend the status quo, they cant be subversive or rebellious

Even fascists are more subversive when they critique the decadence of the technocratic cosmopolitan bug men that form neo liberalism

I think the next decades are going to pretty much be every ideology dunking on neolibs till they kill themselves

If these countries try to keep any of the wealth produced through trade with the US for their own development the neoliberals will be the ones preparing the color revolutions and coups. Moral my ass. The best thing the first world can do for the third world is stop ratfucking their socialist governments; figure out trade and immigration issues later.

The Chicago school were classical liberals who fused liberalism with the already existing undercurrent of libertarianism.

The original neo-liberals were a group that split from Mises and Hayek. Most notably Rüstow and Lippmann.

Another reason to oppose immigration is that you are brain draining the third world

They want that. The goal is to keep the first world (America especially) on top for as long possible. Everything bad about neoliberalism is intentional, everything good is an accident.

He's completely right. We should ban both immigration AND trade in order for it to work properly.

The meaning of the word changed from what it was intended to mean when it was coined. In modern economics it tends to occupy the far-right to centre-right of the marginalist economic spectrum


It found a cultural complement in Clintonism which helped spawn the whole socially-left, fiscally conservative meme
jacobinmag.com/2016/04/chait-neoliberal-new-inquiry-democrats-socialism/

True. Open borders without communism is hardly a desirable thing.

Like how the meaning of socialism changed to mean big goverment?

man this board is a goldmine for truly deluded people

...

Communism isn't a brainlets. Go back to "researching" interracial porn on Holla Forums.

You don't need a powerful government to protect you from capital once the means of production have been seized and the capitalists relieved of their heads. Those who think that socialism requires a vast bloated government grossly underestimate the amount of effort capitalist governments have to put into preventing market failures and treating their symptoms when they occur.

I tell them that we should aid those countries to perform import-substitution-industrialisation.

Then I strangle them to death before they start their bullshit about how free trade is better. There are no losers in the ISI-Socdem world (except the environment, but that's dead anyway), there are losers of globalisation.


This is also a tempting option. I mean if it comes down to it, I really would prefer to just condemn swathes of the world to poverty than concede anything to neoliberals. Even if they are right - and for swathes of good reasons they aren't - I have more investment in seeing them eat shit then I have in improving the world now. They created this monster and I won't rest until I've devoured them.

Say what you will about the tenets of Not Socialism, dude, at least it's an ethos

...