this mostly applies to the U.S. but also most of the western world:

As Marxists we know that most policy is driven by what capital allows or within the increasingly narrow range of acceptable discourse it allows within bourgeois dictatorship

Obviously it's not a conspiracy of ten guys in a secret room but a general consensus that develops from a chaotic web-like oligarchy of money peddlers, influencers, lackeys, billionaire puppetmasters, etc

But this really, really hurts Capital. they need the influx of cheap labor or face the real threat of forced degrowth. and we know every international-community-1 international-community-2 including russia-cool is trying to make it harder for people to be childless but short of forcing people to procreate at gunpoint..

  • so why allow this to become a bipartisan consensus (U.S.) instead of say throwing some scraps of social democratic programs?

  • or in Europe's case allowing these parties to come to power instead of reversing some neoliberal austerity?

Is this a case of anti-immigration just being easier to do vs. building resiliency into the system? i mean it's always easier to write laws crimializing stuff and throwing cops at a problem i suppose

Or something else?

  • SerLava [he/him]
    ·
    3 months ago

    Rhetoric is ramping up and sometimes the conservative movement catches the car. They caught the car on Roe v. Wade.

    They might catch the car on this and that's terrifying as well. It would be one of the world's largest ethnic cleansing campaigns.

    But they don't really mean it. They have never wanted to deport all immigrants, they have always wanted to keep them here and keep them individually deportable at will. That gives capitalists a much more exploitable workforce.