Mass immigration

I did not know, I rarely come here.

No.

They should be shipped to america.

Yes it is our moral duty to care for them.

Explain. I looked it and and didn't see anything aside from being a WW2 battlefield.

...

...

Im full globalist. Communism is nice but globalism is the only way for people to survive ww3.

No.

Deposing Mossadegh, propping up the Shah, supporting Israel and Saudi Arabia, deposing Saddam, funding the Muhajideen in Afghanistan, deposing Gaddafi, weakening Assad, etc.

Yes.

Jesus is the best philosopher for a communist.

...

Americans imposing their control.

We have to save the world and you only care about this?

...

Oh wow capitalism is the least of our problems. Im full communist but there will not be any people for communism if there is a nuclear war.

You take that back right now.

t. CNN

Have you not learned anything from cold war? There was a good reason why Soviet Union didnt invade the weak west.

Because they literally have nothing to gain from that, dumbass

Im not talking abot small player NORKS.

>>>/suicide/

So much to gain from full Soviet Victory but nuclear weapons changed the game.

I hope they nuke us, though

You are so horribly wrong that it's funny. The only way to save the world is complete nuclear war. Trying to prevent it is counter intuitive.

I have marxist leninist learning and worker struggle comes next to all workers dying.

...

🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

really gets the noggin joggin

Can we please stop having this thread?

...

So there's two leftist perspectives on immigration. One I'd call "finalism"; that we should only be advancing the policies that are our ultimate preference. Our ultimate preference, of course, is international liberty and equality of wealth, so we should of course advocate for open borders right now even if there's a litany of other issues to be addressed. Then, however, there's the reformist perspective; that at any individual point in time, including now, we ought to be advancing the policy that advances quality of life the most assuming everything else stays the same. From that standpoint, domestic workers suffer under mass immigration. However, foreign workers benefit from it, and I think it can convincingly be argued that the benefits are more than the losses, even if everything else stays the same. Thus, to oppose mass immigration from a leftist perspective is to be both reformist and "nationalist", or weighing the interests of the native higher than the interests of the foreigner.

I, personally, am a pretty firm reformist and moreover a republican, so I'm fine with recommending policy that would not have the republic I live in sacrificing the welfare of its citizens for the welfare of foreigners. However, I have a feeling most of you lot who are against mass immigration think you're neither reformers nor nationalists/republicans, so I'd invite you to think carefully about what exactly you believe and whether it's consistent.

...