N O • B O R D E R

Go away, Reddit.

Open borders under capitalism is still capital exploitation. All demographic crisis have their root in economic exploitation and the need to import/export capital at the expense of the workers so they can sell their labor for the best price. Under socialism, there would still be movement of individuals but mass migrations due to material conditions will cease to exist.

No, not really. Borders can only exist along with the underlying concept of private property. Their only function in a neoliberal context is to establish zones of control and exploitation. Without borders, the neoliberal process of capital accumulation would break down, and they'd lose a significant tool in keeping the working class divided.

Really, it's like saying public utilities or national parks are the same as the historical commons. Superficially they might share similarities, but I'm purpose and function they are completely different.

Good thing I'm technically not a socialist

Thanks for the update, we'll all sleep better knowing the position of Gay Nazi user.

Yeah but nah. Us communists oppose the very notion of borders on the basis that the negation of capital necessarily means the end of borders. It doesn't make us philatropists who are willing to join the ranks of social democracy, left-neoliberalism and others in the left wing of capital to help diversify and better mix and control the wage-labouring condition.

As Marx and Engels said in the Communist Manifesto's third chapter:
>A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.
>To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of “socialism has”, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.
We may as well stop pretending to be apart of the communist movement if we are in the business of altering the way wage-labourers are, for better or worse, since our desire much more radically the end of the wage-labouring condition. The bourgeoisie and the workers themselves, much to the delight of the bourgeoisie, are capable of this best without our help.

I can if open borders are against the interests of working class.

...

You're an hypocrite. You would never pretend that supporting native workers seeking better prospects was "philanthropy" or "left-neoliberalism." You simply hold the rights of natives and immigrants to different standards.

There is such a thing as gradualism. Pretty much nobody here believes we should instantly erase all the borders tomorrow

Are immigrants not part of the working class? Then it follows that allowing them to enjoy vastly better wages and conditions than they would otherwise have lived with in their country of origin is in the interests of (at the very least a segment of) the working class.

Unless by "working class" you really mean "the native working class", in which case it could be argued that there might be a minor downward pressure on wages for certain low-skilled jobs. But then, you would also have to support white workers in mid-19th-century America who opposed the abolition of slavery because it would flood the job market with newly-freed black men.

Open Borders are shit.They lower wages and destroy Union moments. Also is socialism they’ll be needed to stop criminals from moving places

Holy shit. A left com isn’t fully retarted.

Socialism in one Country is a good position because the revolution won’t succeed everywhere. However just because that is true doesn’t mean socialism can’t be established.

The native working class includes minorities

Lmao

It is hardly as clear-cut. It is possible that immigration could cause a minor decrease in the wages of certain low-skilled occupations, but that's about it. The long-term impacts actually tends to benefit natives.

Stop LARPing as if you were a syndicalist during the Winter of Discontent, unions in the developed world have been dead for decades and immigration played little role in that evolution. In fact, many industrial actions in '80s France were initiated and led by immigrants.

I agree 100%

NO BORDERS NO NATIONS STOP THE DEPORTATIONS

Plenty of liberals support the idea of tightening boarder restrictions, are you some kind of American?

This man gets it. Immigrants work for wages more reasonable to Our Lord The Market and don't make as many ridiculous demands, making The Economy more efficient. Sure, a few million lazy, entitled, natives are out of a job, but they're poor anyway and barely buy anything so if anything they deserve it, the lazy fucks. If they want a job so badly they could always ask their daddy for a CEO position in a small multi-million dollar company anyway.
Yep, look at the bottom lines for next quarter (that's long-term, right?). Even natives with only a few millions in the military industry, and even consumer goods while the welfare lasts, are making a good profit. Worst case the natives have to spend a few months in their private island until the EU army restores order when things collapse. The best part is we get to sell the bombs that'll destroy those old buildings and inevitable casualties, the bricks to rebuild them and the hospitals to treat them. Of course, they won't be able to afford either, but we can lend them the money at a fair Market price.

That's where you're wrong, kiddo
communistpartyofireland.ie/sv2016-08/05-immigration.html

Yeah, only native Porkies. Not native workers. Immigrants except lower wages. This increase exploitation. With more worker exploitation the rate of profit temporarily increases. If we want to relisticly build a chance for socialism to be successful we need to make the rate of profit negative.

This is incorrect.

If capitalists don't get the opportunity to increase exploitation because say, immigrants enjoy the same social rights as natives, they can't do it.

Immigrants except lower wages for the same amount of labor. This is how capitalists increase exploitation through immigration.

No they don't they're subject to the same laws as everyone else retard. It's ILLEGALS who do that, which is why a path towards citizenship would easily eliminate such concerns.

Brain drain OP

I'm all for the collapse of nation-states and thud borders, but at this current time it only hurts everyone. It hurts the country the person is immigrating from, and largely only helps the rich drive down wages through increased job competition

Illegals shouldn’t be here to begin with. I hope they go back to there home countries instead of staying here. Even there were granted citizenship they’d still take lower wages then minimum wages under the rug. Also average wages for the native working class is above the minimum wage so even if illegals were granted citizenship they’d still be used to decrease native wages and increase exploitation. And this doesn’t even include a cultural analysis.

You're wrong.

Source: my ass, same as yours.

No they don't if they enjoy the same social rights as natives. In the absence of militant unionism and class unity, every worker is likely to accept lower wages.

This.

"Open borders" does not mean no borders. It means outsourcing jobs to countries where labor is cheaper and standards of living are lower, and keeping wages low at home by allowing controlled worker flow from some of those countries.

What's the practical difference between "open borders" and "no border"…?

I could be wrong here, but I think whether or not nation states are allowed to exist/be enforced plays a role.

In practice, "open border" policy still involves enforcement of borders, and exploitation of workers in and outside of those borders. There is some freedom of movement, but this often is limited - ie, the EU open border policy which is more open than most and still only applies to member countries and can be regularly halted.

That's great and all, but we're not living under socialism right now. What, do people who were not lucky enough to be born in Europe have to wait for "socialism" to even possibly get in now?

I would abolish slavery because it's unfair competition

Under a global full Communist earth sure. Under Capitalism, absolfuckinglutely not. monthlyreview.org/2004/04/01/disposable-workers-todays-reserve-army-of-labor/

I'm a between socdem and demsoc, but probably not purist enough
Also I'm pretty spooked

The vast majority of Holla Forums live in rich western countries, so it's unsurprising that they support policies which redistribute wealth within rich western countries but oppose sharing any of that wealth with people from poorer countries.

Watch me

This.

For comunism to succeed you need a strong sense of community and comradery. Un controlled immagration can disrupt this as immigrants will form their own community instead of integrating. This creates social tentions which dammage the trust needed for communism to function. Basically borders onsulate you from capitalists and fuedalists. Eventually they won't be necessary but not in our lifetime.

The racial battle, the racial hate, is being maintained by a small group of beneficiaries. It is a small group who live nowhere, an international group that pits ethnicities against each other, that doesn't want them to be at rest. It is those who feel at home anywhere, who don't have a place where they grew up, who live in Berlin today, in Brussels tomorrow, New York next week, or Shanghai, or London, or Sydney, who feel at home everywhere.
They are the only people who can really be called "international", because they can do their business anywhere. But the workers can't follow them. The worker is bound to his community, the worker doesn't want to leave his village, his family and friends, he is bound to his homeland and wants to improve it. But it is this international group of people, the bourgeoisie, that drives the workers off their land, that starts wars and that encourages mass migration and non-integration, it is this same bourgeoisie that funds racialist and identity political groups like white nationalists, islamic extremists.

Do we simply accept that the bourgoiesie, who control our government and fund both the "left" and "right" of divisive political movements, who start the wars that drive people of their land, that cause the starvation of people, that have destroyed and continue to destroy flourishing countries and nations for their own gain, so we really just go along with their tactics?
Or do we put a stop to this until truly all the workers can be international out of their own free will, instead of being forced out?

Just watch me boi

This is just the usual conservative argument "immigrants aren't compatible with Western society" cloaked in red flags.

Westerners arent compatible with arabian society either.

Open borders under capitalism mean large scale migration. Migration is antithetical to socialism. Kill yourself.

That's a lot of words to simply say you believe shitskins shouldn't be allowed in until "socialism."

what the fuck are you talking about

pick one

Thats very little words for "We should encourage mass scale migrations that disrupt workers organisation, breed fascism and racism and increase the power of the bourgeoisie"

read this book.

I love how liberals like OP think "if you dont agree with me its becuase youre racist".

That's a lot of projection for such a brainlet

Ebin.

Come back when you have more than one sentence long liberal insults.

It doesn't. Union have been busted for decades and this wasn't caused by immigration.

So now immigrants are responsible for the bile that's directed at them? Racism is bred by right-wingers, not migrant workers.

It doesn't. In fact, what empowers the bourgeoisie the most is the availability of vulnerable aliens who wouldn't exist were borders truly open.

That's not what I claimed, I didn't even make any reference to racism. I'm simply pointing at the widespread hypocrisy on this board, where it seems "the working class" actually means "the native working class and fuck everyone else."

It doesn’t matter if there legal. Immigrants still take lower wages.

Wrong. 100% fucking wrong. There used to be enourmously big unions here in europe until the 70's, when the government started importing tons of "guest workers" to do the jobs that the capitalists didnt want to pay that much money for. The guestworkers stayed, of course, and weren't integrated.

All hate has a cause. Right wing populism is caused by economic depressions and scapegoating of a seperated "other" ethic group. This is a historic fact, unless you think that germans in the 30's were inherently fascist, which is an un-marxist view.

Yes, if we had truly open border we would have even more "legal" immigrants with no income, no safetynet, no way to unionise, no training and no choice but to work for exploitative capitalism. If you think it is "illegal" immigrants youre fucking retarded. In europe all immigrants who are being treated like modern day slaves are legal immigrants, either arabs who came here legally or Polish people who are being kept in near-slave conditions.

So this

is "not referencing to racism"?

Implying this is the case (for which I'd like to see evidence), why do you think it is?

I'm going to expand on this difference, it is an interesting topic and a vision from our neoliberal future.
Imagine for a moment that a universal freedom of movement is recognized. All people in the third world will be allowed to move physically (if they can afford it oink) to the West. Now assume at the same time that the government does not treat them as they would citizens. No voting, no welfare state benefits (bennies for short), etc. Only maybe a "right" to utilize the most basic infrastructure, to be policed, and… to work. At that point, porky can employ them at near subsistence wages, and have the benefit of physical proximity to the end consumers of whatever is produced (important for service economy). The end result would be that porky keeps on getting fatter, that castes are created (the owning citizens, those who own nothing but citizenship, the owning outlanders, the outlanders who have nothing but their labour), and that we are nowhere closer to revolution. In fact, we will have fulfilled the vision that third worldists have of our present, where the proletariat in the West, the citizens, are an actual nobility, with a birthright of some value. The whole West, a good billion or so people, would become a sort of army for the true elite, those who for certain benefits keep everyone else in line and uphold the system.

Or maybe when the government embraced neo-liberalism, initiating a global restructuring of capitalism and establishing a political hegemony which were designed to weaken union membership. Developments such as managerialism or the so-called shared economy contributed much more to the decline of unions than immigration.

And what was the correct response to what the Nazis promoted? Fighting against racism and antisemitism among workers, or telling Jews to keep a low profile because their existence "bred hatred"…? Uniting every prole regardless of status, or politely asking Poles to fuck off because they might "be used as scapegoats"…?

Their status wouldn't be different from that of their native counterparts if the government didn't discriminate against them when it comes to social rights. But if you have laws specifically designed to fuck over immigrants, then yes — capitalists will take advantage of that.

Because they can send the money back home where it has far more purchasing power. I know Poles that shack up three to a room so they can send the majority of their wages home.

Adding to that:

You often see polish and other east european truck drivers cook on tiny portable stoves with the cheapest food they can find to save money from the food and gas money they got in cash. They also often fish to get free fish. Its so bad that near me a pond has a sign, in polish, saying fishing is not allowed.

If you want something anicdotal I'm a plumber the average wage is about 30,000 a year before the first wave of cheap labour in the 1990's the wages used to be 60,000 a year.

How could this have happened had the cheap labor enjoyed the same social rights as you do?

Immigrants regardless of social rights still except lower wages.

idiot thread.