I was referring to legal immigrants when it comes to the things involving the "American Dream". Illegals are basically just scabs through and through. They literally bused them in to replace the ironically Hispanic UFW farmhands. In fact, it is desperation and being illegal that makes them such good scabs to begin with.
And, no it isn't. I mostly was referring to native workers, who definitely are not classcucks. There is not "native" bourgeoisie in America, as the entire capitalist class is foreign and international. The only significant native population that believes in that sort of crap are the professional-managerial types, and even then that class is also disproportionately immigrant-filled. In fact, some of the wealthiest groups in America consist of immigrants. (See the eternal pajeet.)
Yes, to Uber drivers. Uber is essentially massive scab operation and should be banned for undercutting cab drivers. As for New York vs Seattle, neither city is cheaper labor wise. The South is scabbing the North due to being right-to-work though, and I honestly have resentments towards classcuck Southerners who don't unionize. Then again, the South is what brought niggers here in the first place, so I guess it's par for the course for them. (Appalachia is the one exception to this rule. I admire them.)
19th century France didn't have high immigration rates. In fact, France had a period of population stagnation due to relatively low birth rates compared to Germany. Europe had more emigration (to America) than immigration from elsewhere. My argument in fact was that France was the model of a "soft" industrialization that was better for workers and unions than America/Britain's hard industrialization. America's mass immigration is what led to the latter, and the consistent problem that unions faced was scab labor and capitalist crackdowns. Guess who filled the ranks of the former, immigrants and niggers. And, guess which party supported the latter, the negroid GOP.
For statistics, you can look at union memberships from when the immigration act was passed by LBJ onwards, or the rise of union membership after the immigration restrictions of the early 20th century. Low immigration wasn't the only factor in this, but it did play a key role along with a prosperous post-war industrial economy.
Depends, if the job can be shipped overseas, then the latter. If not, then the documented immigrant is the "least worst" option for porky.
The neo-liberal restructuring of the workplace relies on mass immigration, to replace the rebellious old workforce with a new one. The unions might've lacked vision as to how to react, (Which ironically would've included rebelling against the Democratic party that was letting in said immigrants) but the capitalist class used immigration as one weapon to destroy the American working class.Basically, I oppose every aspect of neoliberalism.
And here comes the strawmanning. I never said that we ought to ignore capitalists and just attack immigrants. If you actually read my post, you would've noticed that I said "eliminate the capitalists" before bringing up immigrants and lumpens. I blame capitalists for bringing in the immigrants, but that doesn't mean that I have to hold hands with them. Eliminating both is the best option.
My reasoning is built on both anti-immigrant and anti-capitalist sentiment.
Of course, you see to really lack the ability to read. Maybe if you spent more time learning how to read instead of fapping to ganguro anime trash, then maybe you wouldn't be complete trash. :^)