tbh mass immigration from the global south could be a good thing in a sustainable, green, socialist system, but holy shit this is insane under neoliberalism. at least in a green socialist system, youd be putting less strain on the global environment by moving most of humanity to specific highly developed areas of specific continents. this means the productive forces can be pushed into communism and skip over capitalist stages for developing regions.
Why would there even continue to be a global south under Green Socialism? There would be a massive redistribution of plundered wealth out of the colonial core back to the places from which said weath was plundered.
it can be very expensive, carbon wise, to develop certain areas extensively. most of south america, south east asia, and the congo should just be left alone, for example, except for maybe some choice coastal cities.
china, north america along the mississippi, the indus and ganges, and the rhineland are probably the best places for human development. generally any area with big rivers and lots of plains in order to avoid cutting down forests.
and i fail to see how getting people to immigrate to the former imperial core wouldnt also be considered a redistribution of wealth, assuming all services are rendered equally
tbh mass immigration from the global south could be a good thing in a sustainable, green, socialist system, but holy shit this is insane under neoliberalism. at least in a green socialist system, youd be putting less strain on the global environment by moving most of humanity to specific highly developed areas of specific continents. this means the productive forces can be pushed into communism and skip over capitalist stages for developing regions.
Why would there even continue to be a global south under Green Socialism? There would be a massive redistribution of plundered wealth out of the colonial core back to the places from which said weath was plundered.
deleted by creator
it can be very expensive, carbon wise, to develop certain areas extensively. most of south america, south east asia, and the congo should just be left alone, for example, except for maybe some choice coastal cities.
china, north america along the mississippi, the indus and ganges, and the rhineland are probably the best places for human development. generally any area with big rivers and lots of plains in order to avoid cutting down forests.
and i fail to see how getting people to immigrate to the former imperial core wouldnt also be considered a redistribution of wealth, assuming all services are rendered equally