On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Tom Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm with you in principle on this, raghu, but not so much in practice. > Capital can and does use immigration (sometimes aggressively) as a > wage-cutting and union-busting strategy. This alone makes immigration less > than a "pure" matter of human rights and social equality. But there is also > the threat of right-wing "populism" exploiting the toxic mixture of job > competition and xenophobia. So to be "politically correct" on immigration > may amount to wishful thinking and a strategy of political impotence. I am not sure what the "politically correct" position is on immigration, but what choice do progressives have in this matter? Right-wing populism is a danger no matter what politics you adopt. I'd argue that a MUCH more sensible position for progressives to take on immigration is to tie it with "free trade policies". To the extent, free-trade policies are good or bad, surely free movement of labor must be good or bad as well. And of course as a practical matter, so-called "illegal immigration" is indeed closely tied with "free-trade" agreements. I should also add that my objection to Daly goes beyond just the immigration issue. It seems more generally that he is ideologically aligned with Thomas Malthus and Garrett Hardin. -raghu.
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
