The destruction and abandonment of labor politics means that, at present, immigration issues can only play out within the framework of a culture war, fought entirely on moral grounds.
To say that the Left has “painted itself into a corner” on the topic of open borders and mass migration is to say no more than the truth:
“The destruction and abandonment of labor politics means that, at present, immigration issues can only play out within the framework of a culture war, fought entirely on moral grounds. In the heightened emotions of America’s public debate on migration, a simple moral and political dichotomy prevails. It is ‘right-wing’ to be ‘against immigration’ and ‘left-wing’ to be ‘for immigration.’ But the economics of migration tell a different story…
“While no serious political party of the Left is offering concrete proposals for a truly borderless society, by embracing the moral arguments of the open-borders Left and the economic arguments of free market think tanks, the Left has painted itself into a corner. If ‘no human is illegal!,’ as the protest chant goes, the Left is implicitly accepting the moral case for no borders or sovereign nations at all. But what implications will unlimited migration have for projects like universal public health care and education, or a federal jobs guarantee? And how will progressives convincingly explain these goals to the public?”
As this article points out in stark terms, the American Left in general, and the Democratic Party in specific, is going to have to wrestle with the fundamental question that leftist and center-left parties in Europe are already grappling with, namely, what does it want to be when it grows up? What are the core values, and the core constituency, on which it wishes to focus?
Ultimately – and probably sooner rather than later – American Democrats are going to have to choose:
Do they want to be the party of mass migration and open borders, or do they want to be party of a social safety net that assists the disadvantaged (and really, anyone who is not part of the infamous “1%”) and those struggling here at home? They are going to have to choose one or the other, because there is not enough money, and there are not enough resources, to do both.
Lofty ideals and stirring rhetoric aside, we simply cannot “feed the world.” There is too much world out there. So are we going to do what we can to help, while focusing our finite energy, attention, and resources on the plight of our own people? Or are we going to tear down the borders, and lay prostrate at the feet of a wave of economic migration that will diminish if not destroy everything we have built here over the last several centuries, for little if any improvement in their own situation?
The time of choice is drawing near. Indeed, it is already upon us!
N.B.: I am looking at this from the perspective of my own country – the U.S. – and the West in general, but the article also makes the point that mass migration is actually harming rather than helping the migrants’ countries of origin:
“Despite the rhetoric about ‘shithole countries’ or nations ‘not sending their best,’ the toll of the migration brain drain on developing economies has been enormous… Developing countries are struggling to retain their skilled and professional citizens, often trained at great public cost, because the largest and wealthiest economies that dominate the global market have the wealth to snap them up… It is not difficult to see why the political and economic elites of the world’s richest countries would want the world to ‘send their best,’ regardless of the consequences for the rest of the world. But why is the moralizing, pro–open borders Left providing a humanitarian face for this naked self-interest?”
“According to the best analysis of capital flows and global wealth today, globalization is enriching the wealthiest people in the wealthiest countries at the expense of the poorest, not the other way around…. Global wealth inequality is the primary push factor driving mass migration, and the globalization of capital cannot be separated from this matter. There is also the pull factor of exploitative employers in the United States who seek to profit from non-unionized, low-wage workers in sectors like agriculture as well as through the importation of a large white-collar workforce already trained in other countries.”
But what do we hear about this from the Left, traditionally the defenders of workers and the poor, against rapacious capitalists? Nothing. Nada. Crickets.
I have often talked about the unholy alliance between Washington, DC, and Wall Street; an even more unholy and damaging one may be between the corporate capitalists, profiteers, and neo-robber barons, and the supposedly “moral” Left, with its apparent desire to welcome anyone who is not of Western (read: European) origin.
In their desire to pull down what they see as “oppressive” structures of Western civilization, the Left is willing to make common cause with their greatest historic enemy – capital – and sell out their own natural constituency, labor. Want to talk about “collusion”…? There’s your collusion!
In any case, read the article, all of it. Read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest! Much that’s worth thinking about in it, although it’s far from comforting.