What would a left response to the immigration crisis look like?

I'm a brit, I have no idea what we should do but I think it is clear that the current wave of migration cannot go on forever. Do you think that we should keep the borders open and welcome these people and build solidarity, or should we take more of a nationalist apporach and try and keep migration to a minimum until we have an established based from which to work. I'm more in the latter camp. Any input welcome

Other urls found in this thread:

communistpartyofireland.ie/sv2016-08/05-immigration.html
communistpartyofireland.ie/sv2016-09/06-migration.html
theconversation.com/if-aid-budgets-are-used-to-help-refugees-at-home-is-it-still-foreign-aid-47331
huffingtonpost.com/adam-moe-fejerskov/foreign-aid-europe-refugee-crisis_b_8869794.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

kill americans. thats all.

Take in Syrians, Lybians, Iraqis and Afghans as refugees given temporary asylum.

Everybody else: Fuck off we're full

agreed, but; being unable to do that, what should we do?

why those peoples?

>>>/int/
Fuck off nationalists

I dunno user. Why do you think?

How am I supposed to respond to the "theyre just dishwashers & doctors, do you have a PHD, do you want to be a dishwasher all your life? Dey took our jerbs!" Argument? Im too fucking sleepy to deal with this liberal ideology

Abolition of borders and full-stop rejection of cultural relativism

I'm asking why not Eritreans or any of the north african people who are also migrating and using the current crisis to try and seek a better life. There are stats that north africans tend to commit more crime, I was wondering if that was a factor

Theres nothing special about native or western culture. But I just dont wanna stone gays or sacrifice kids for rain or some shit

general debt jubilee enforced militarily to stop forceful extraction of resources from the third world
nationalization of assets and heavy material investment in automation to make jobs less labor-consumptive
trades of highly developed infrastructure and machinery for raw materials
domestic rationing to check consumption, allowing resources to be diverted to foreign aid and building more infrastructure/machinery elsewhere
ending intellectual property, allowing the foreign bourgeois to step in and drastically improve production without having to pay rent to Westerners
generally permissive immigration stance but taking the principle of "if you don't work, you don't eat" much more seriously for immigrants than native citizens
actual action against climate change; i'm talking ww2-tier mobilization of the populace to convert the economy into being carbon neutral or negative asap

We're full

Open borders are utopian idealist nonsense. Allow a moderate amount of immigration from all countries, especially those fleeing horrible conditions like Syria, and welcome them as comrades. But opening the gates just fuels right-wing reaction for no good reason.

If we take them in, we should use this as a time to properly educate them in work fields so when they return to their country, they will value their education and use it to rebuild their nation which would solve the immigration crisis by removing the cause for immigration

Also, if NATO could not invade everything that would help

Kill bourgeoisie and their faggy puppets.

Come on guys help a nigga out.

this is a problem with neoliberal capitalism, when everyone is an atmoised unit, it's not about who you are, or your community, but how useful you are to capital

tell them you are a socialist, and a s such you want to help the working class as a whole. Picking one nations workers over the other is arbitrary.

utopian answer: immediate global communism
pragmatic answer: ban Zionism

oh I forgot: incinerate Saudi Arabia

Firstly end imperialism, nothing good can be achieved without that

We're (ie America and it's running dogs) also extremely butthurt at Chinese expansion in Africa and Africom is there to drive them out, there's also the attempt to seperate Iran and Pakistan from China, shouldn't we accept the refugees these new agressions are going to create?

Close borders and moves everyone back where they ara from.
At the same time stop imperialism from other countries and wars.
Forced Multiculturalism is americanism

This guy gets it.

And drive down the cost of labor for all workers while giving porky another bogeyman to divide proles with? No

that's about it, but it assumes your party has control of the government and you're not some prole watching the mess powerless.

(me)
Finger-printing technology is so cheap even my Gym has it, this should be a no-brainer.
lots of pictures too, height, maybe DNA, some of them will likely be jihadist, but that doesn't justify leaving hundreds of thousands to die.

This really is key. Somewhere along the way refugees went from people just fleeing a war to people seeking a new home after war ruined their old home. Refugees should be made well aware that they will have to return when it is safe to return.

I should also add:

Immediately nuke Saudi Arabia and install a direct colonial government indefinitely.

Mass employment through state-funded infrastructure.

End the cultural relativism debate forever and force immigrants to learn the local language, drop the veil and force them to read books on sexual education.

The "problem" with a FAQ for every country is that it forces the native plebs to own up to their own mistakes. Can't have that in a democracy, can we?

It's difficult because the only proper answer is global socialism. But that's not a platform that a national party can run on.

I said as much in a very quickly anchored Camp of the Saints thread the other day: immigrants don't like immigration for the most part. They want to escape objectively miserable conditions, but do you think they want to learn a new language, deal with a new culture, feel out of place everywhere they go? No.

100% socialism with 100% open borders would mean less immigration. I am positive of this. But "100% socialism" is a nagging point, huh.

Stop the wars.

Take every last one, from fearful closeted atheists and homosexuals to ultraspooked reactionary criminals, to make sure capitalists have as many desperate proles as possible competing for ever scarcer jobs so that wages and work conditions are crushed. Tax the native proles to fund this.
Call any kind of disagreement with this 'racist' and 'white supremacist' and 'islamophobic' and make sure never to even entertain the possibility that proles might disagree with this for material reasons.
Make sure that media and authorities hide the inevitable problems, to safeguard profits.
Make sure to allocate these masses to prole neighborhoods, so that capitalists and their daughters will be safe in their private schools and their gated communities.

Is not 'open borders, gated communities' the perfect slogan for bourgeois liberalism?

You will not fix anything by letting these people in. There's a reason why porky says we need to let in his cheap labo- I mean suffering refoogies. The same porky that started the wars in the first place to make an excuse for bringing them in.

You need to encourage these to take back their own countries and improve them. Their women are taking up arms because their men are too cowardly to fight for their own homeland. Most migrants come to the west because they want a comfortable bourgie life.

Even if you take the "best people" from these groups, you're taking away people that could've otherwise helped their own country's situation.
And for the people coming from places actually fleeing war (10%), they would be much better off if there was a resettlement program in a similar welcoming country to the one they came from.

I've always wanted to see a response to immigration that involves the West themselves emigrating to these countries, attempting to stabilize and improve them so there is no incentive to leave. There should be a massive movement of organized Western labor, technology and supplies to countries in the global south, focusing on building resilient basic infrastructure, lowering birthrates and improving healthcare/public services. The Left could focus on promoting cooperatives or unions/workers' councils, local democracies, or other forms of governance to keep communities together.

But of course this is supremely unprofitable, and offends elitist liberal sensibilities, so instead we have to quibble over immigration quotas.

Not quite. The wars are started by Israel and Saudi Arabia paying off the US. The new arrivals to Europe are closer to imported cosumers than cheap labor - many of them don't work, but the welfare system effectively takes money from natives and gives it to refugees so that it can be spent and flow to capitalists.

Who is this "we" you're talking about? Has Porky's dictatorship been overthrown and replaced by ours last night, and I haven't heard about it?

We used to do that and they called it evil imperialism.

to Holla Forums everything left of Pinochet and Hitler is pure communism

Fuck em ban em
Were full

I'm mostly for the Jezza approach. Control the immigration, make sure everyone is registered, and distribute the load so that certain countries or areas aren't overburdened. Also get them out of the ghettos and refugee camps and get them integrated (give them language courses, have them live in the same places that everyone else lives), since that's the main source of racial tension. This should be coupled with a foreign policy that seeks to resolve the conflicts in the middle east and build the economy of 3rd world countries so that people aren't pressured to emigrate (and so that the people who do might eventually be able to return)

This. Immigrants need to know our language and culture beyond being able to recite the 50 states

Also, just fucking give the institutions enough funding to do their job instead of spending all the money on bombing the very same countries people are fleeing from. The western response to this crisis is literally to pour gasoline on the fire with one hand and pouring water on it with the other, and they still wonder why the problem is only getting worse.

Not starting wars and not exploiting the third world for resources.

there is no war in Eritrea

The post-colonial south tried to do it themselves last century and we crushed them via IMF loans and "anti-communist" coups. Now their repression will be coming home to roost in the form of desperate, increasingly radicalized climate and war refugees.

Perhaps if privileged western leftists got off their asses and went overseas en masse, the way Cuban doctors do, with the goal of building up poorer states and building solidarity, their parent states wouldn't be so quick to bomb them into oblivion.

communistpartyofireland.ie/sv2016-08/05-immigration.html
communistpartyofireland.ie/sv2016-09/06-migration.html

The humanitarian justification for immigration is absolute horseshit, slave trade 2.0, top to bottom. With the sole exception of reparations sent by (underpaid, deperately poor) immigrants to their families, something we could do far better ourselves if we chose to.

A lot of good posts in this thread. Regarding economic migrants"refugees" specifically, something a lot of shills are loathe to admit is that not only is bringing 3rd-world refugees to the 1st-world an indirect waste of money and human lives due to massive gulf between cost-of-living, but that foreign aid for internal and regional refugees overseas has been DIRECTLY CUT to fund immigrants in the 1st-world:
theconversation.com/if-aid-budgets-are-used-to-help-refugees-at-home-is-it-still-foreign-aid-47331
huffingtonpost.com/adam-moe-fejerskov/foreign-aid-europe-refugee-crisis_b_8869794.html

I would be entirely unsurprised if the wars and other instability devastating regions near 1st-world nations are being incentivized directly by "willing" immigrants and a humanitarian pretext to admit them.

This, except last paragraph.

THIS!
Stop hurting them, pay for temporary accommodations at home or in economically similar nearby countries, peacefully stabilize them, organize regional peacekeeping forces (Arab League, African Union, etc.), spend much more on foreign aid.

You wouldn't even have to bomb them, the House of Saud is a house of cards, floating atop a sea of non-Wahhabi religious majorities that hate them, not to mention millions of figuratively or literally enslaved Asian and African "guest workers".

Gotta admit, a "humanitarian WWIII" would be pretty awesome. No loans producing predatory perverse incentives, no unilateral military actions outside joint-UN security in reaction to locally-recognized bandits, just bribe the dictators loose peacefully from their thrones instead of "democracy at the barrel of a gun".

Little-known fact: Every time Peace Corps funding is increased, volunteer numbers go up. What would happen if the US alone poured the $1.4 trillion wasted every year on our military into foreign development? How generous would the American people turn out to be? What about the trillions a year wasted on post-Cold War militaries around the 1st-world?

open borders would be okay if all countries had open borders. in a world of free moving capital but restricted moving labor, the country with the most open borders' working class gets shafted. its not racism its just the way labor and capital work.

europe can be all moral about it and open their borders if "they" want to. this will not be tolerated for long.

what should be asked seriously is why the wealthy arab states in the region do not take in the refugees. other than jordan. the issue of blame is sort of meaningless, no one really cares abut it and it isnt relevant in the real world. why arent the middle eastern countries put under at least some burden to accept these refugees while europe is not?