What’s lost in the immigration debate

The majority of immigration to any given Western country comes from areas that have either been colonized by that country or else stand in a looser relationship of subordination and dependency. While presumably there are still at least two or three people who believe the ideological bullshit of the “civilizing mission,” most adult human beings recognize that the whole point of colonization and subordination of other countries is to gain access to their wealth and resources so that they can be expropriated for the enrichment of the colonizer or dominant country.

Hence it’s not just that the target country happens to be rich while the immigrant’s home country happens to be poor (or, I might add, in political turmoil, in a state of civil war, etc., etc.). Those conditions hold in the home country because of the destructive effects of Western involvement — not just during the era of “official” colonization, but on an ongoing basis. People generally don’t leave prosperous, self-sufficient countries en masse in order to drive cabs and clean hotel rooms in a foreign country where they will be hated and scapegoated.

Rather than recognize this simple truth and act with some basic human decency, though, the former and current imperial powers choose to demonize the immigration their own exploitative and unjust domination has produced — and they would rather let the people whose nations they continue to despoil drown or die in the desert than let them drive those cabs and clean those hotel rooms.

5 Responses to “What’s lost in the immigration debate”

  1. Asteele Says:

    I’m beginning to think that the nation of Islam is right, and white men are demons.

  2. Adam Kotsko Says:

    It was exceptionally bad luck of the draw that we were the first ones to reach industrialism.

  3. paul Says:

    This is particularly relevant to immigration from Central America to the U.S. I mean, back in the 80s the government was supporting the very regimes in El Salvador and Guatemala people were fleeing from, but refugees still had to fight tooth and nail to even get asylum because that would have meant that the U.S. government admitted the fact that the regimes it supported were commiting atrocities. A real low point in U.S. history.

  4. Asteele Says:

    I’m sorry for double posting, but people need to read that article it’s literally the complete negation of the law in the service of white supremacy. The first time in all of American history where a man was found innocent, because you charged him(of course) with to lesser a crime. It turms out you can never charge a cop with exactly the right crime.


Comments are closed.