Reminder that supporting borders is incompatible with proletarian internationalism and real socialism

muslims in the west consistently support left and left-liberal parties

When it comes to attitudes towards capital, class consciousness and so on, this is just false. They are equally ignorant on in as the natives. But there are a host of other reasons why it's a bad idea. On a very basic level, you can't organize workers if you can't even understand one another, speak the same language. Burgers especially seem to forget that there are actually all these different languages being spoken out there. Good luck trying to organize a mixed group of Turkmen, Dari and Pashto speakers at the workplace - and those are just the Afghans! Many more cultural artifacts that have very real effects.
The biggest effect of mass migration has historically proven to be to make proles very scared of one another.

More strategic thinking than "hurrr abolish bordurrr" is needed.

You mean liberal parties that promise benefits for them?

lmao

how is this bad?
oh, sorry they aren't voting for communists every time, unlike all the non-muslims

Other red liberals such as yourself are over at r/socialism.

Those demanding sharia law are to be shot and those spooked on religion go in the gulag.

This is some of the reason why I can't define myself as lefty.
Why can't we just promote socialism in one country, for the one people living in that country? When we show how good it is, people in other countries will join, and we can roll that way, with borders and nations still existing.

Because the UN won't let you. America won't let you. It's not the Cold War anymore, but it never stops. You must expand, violently if necessary and take as much land from the bastards as you can.

They'll fuck you over in the end if you can't show enough force to break borders. It's futile to even attempt.

Right now, toppling USA isn't hard. It's toppling USA AND getting an outcome you want that is.

We're a ways away.

You need many nations to have internationalism, it's not the same as one world gov.

nation != government

The structure of the global economy mostly. Any one country that socializes would likely be frozen out of global resource markets, have a hard time acquiring foreign capital goods, and so on. Unless you have the base for autarky, like the Soviet Union sort of did, you're going to face major problems without a socialist block to trade with.

And basically all posters on Holla Forums will be from the USA, the EU, Canada, or Australia, all of which are sufficiently large and developed to enter autarky.

Of those, only the US, and even they would have a huge headache reconstructing supply chains. Canada and Australia don't have everything they could need, just huge reserves of certain raw materials. The otoh EU is not a country, and at this point resource poor. Any one country in the EU turning that isn't Germany or France will be crushed like Greece.

...

lol fuck off fash, >>>Holla Forums is that way

wdhmbt?

Secular Islam should be unironically promoted.

gave a good response but I never understood the psychology of non-internationalist socialist.

Yes, Secular Islam. You've never heard of the Kurds, or, the Near East before it was fucking raped into barbarism by the West the past century during the Cold War.

meant for >>2071100

Nobody is. That wasn't my point. Anyone educated about the region would understand the fucking point. People like Assad should be promoted, not people in Saudi fucking Arabia

reminder this is Holla Forums

I don't even just mean that. You can't ask for an entire religion to just stop, even the Soviets knew that when they had their power over Afghanistan.

You won't get anywhere with a religion unless its reformed into difference.

The Kurds have done this nicely. So have others in the past. And somewhat the present.

Something like that. It was casual word use to prove a point. I didn't mean "non religious religion", what I meant you can get smart ass.

what are you even trying to say? Socialism faces opposition so we shouldn't be international? Who said anything about "proving themselves deserving"?

Article 3 of the 1973 Syrian constitution declares Islamic jurisprudence one of Syria's main sources of legislation.[143] The Personal Status Law 59 of 1953 (amended by Law 34 of 1975) is essentially a codified Islamic law.[144] The Code of Personal Status is applied to Muslims by Sharia courts.[145] In Sharia courts, a woman's testimony is worth only half of a man's.[146]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_Islamic_law_by_country#Asia

This is terrible fucking strategy

All the more reason to discourage national movements and support internationalist ones. A movement of international of workers groups working together is better than nationalist ones working for only their own end

Agree.

...

Chances are they work with or live with people that are multilingual. It's really not a big deal.

Aside from [citation needed] labor history is replete with examples of people crossing national and ethnic boundaries in the name of working class solidarity, or at least organizing to keep from getting killed by the machines they work.

Opening borders in a vacuum, retarded and counter revolutionary. Borders open as a result of a successful transition to stateless communism. What kind of fucking retard wants open borders before that when the world is in chaos. You will only get genocide in the long run, and kill any revolution.

This.
Also zizek
youtube.com/watch?v=J5qEmvL-D0w

Also if the option is a far worse life but helping A TINY proportion of the people who want to leave their home to come to places that are not as shit, then 100 times out of 100 people will choose not destroying what they have. All revolutions must be better than what came before or they cannot be justified. Good intentions have no place in that, if they improve nothing but feelings of liberal elites.

but it's true. I'm not saying it can't be resolved but they do more damage than they contribute.

but it's true. I'm not saying it can't be resolved but they do more damage than they contribute.

to just blindly advocate for open borders and ignore the fact that "open borders" and nothing other than that only serves to benefit the neoliberals is retarded tbqh

i'm pro immigration but in the short term have no problems with borders. doesn't make right wingers correct at all, tho. i am still pro immigration with workers rights being bolstered no matter what nation they are from.

Supporting anything under the status quo is retarded. One way or another porky will drive down wages and direct labor and capital to suit their wants. We may as well advocate for international revolution instead of playing porky's game.

Emma Goldman used to give speeches to workers in both German and English, back when class consciousness wasn't at the shitty low it's at now. furthermore, depending on the region you're talking about there are often one or two languages that most people know. people find ways of getting around these barriers in the real world.

literally not surprised from someone as liberal and anticom as you

except controlled borders and open borders aren't the same thing. virtually every country on earth maintains controls on how many immigrants and people with which skillsets, how much money behind them, etc. they allow in. I'm convinced this open borders meme has to be some kind of liberal and/or altright psyop because you're talking about something that doesn't exist. I'd also like to see which country in 2017 maintains a strict prohibition on any kind of migration. I think the closest you could find would be Japan and I'm sure that's still highly conditional.