Since the 1950s America has had no real working class. No proletarian no Revolution. But if we could import a working class from the 3rd world eventually they can form the angry masses that can bring about Revolution! My wife tells me that since immigrants hurt the average worker Marxists should support limiting immigration but shes full of it. No?
2007-09-30 02:33:02 · 17 answers · asked by star runner 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
As an American it is your duty to uphold our law.
(Tin Man thinking to self: I wonder if this is the scarecrow with a new ID....'cause whoever posted this sure doesn't have a brain....)
2007-09-30 03:17:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
You're better off following Groucho than Karl, but if you insist.
Neither you nor your wife has taken into account the immense changes since Marx's time. Were he alive today, I think he'd have rolled with the punches like most political and economic theorists, eaten a platter or two of crow (humble pie), and rewritten most of his early ideas.
Marx died in 1883, still holding fast to the certainty that capitalism would never permit a well-paid working class. That was 30 years before Henry Ford introduced the Five Dollar Day for his workers, the trickle-down from which sparked exactly the economic growth Marx insisted would never happen.
You mentioned angry masses. How would they influence the educated masses who generally see problems as complex where mobs see only a "Bad Guy" and scads of poor-little-me victims? Sure, you could do your worst by bringing in millions of illegals but it would probably backfire as soon as the educated masses get fed up and take action.
Marx's idea of a reserve army of labor has fallen flat, if not shattered, as most capitalist nations have experience a DECLINING birthrate, smaller populations and continuing growth of income, mostly due to automation - people build and maintain machines that give them huge quantities of product which they "barter" under the monetary system for other products made by machines that are built and maintained by ever-richer people.
All I can say in your defense is that there ARE capitalists who endanger long-term stability by buying into short-term gain. Those are the losers who hire your illegal immigrants.
...
2007-09-30 19:30:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, a lot of Marxists think like you do. Mind you they are callously judging that ruining things for the average worker today to the point where they revolt is an acceptable interim step, although that would likely lose a decent life for generations of Americans and legal immigrants.
I think world wide the time it will take to get a meaningful revolution can be judged between the gap in lifestyles between American workers and those in Dafur. So long as there are poorer, hungrier workers somewhere in the world, globalist business will be able to make money with their governments and those with 'only' labor to offer will be squeezed out, under globalist policies.
Then you are fighting military with uneducated masses, and that is very different in today's world of body armour and technology than it was in Marx's time.
I think if immigration is limited, each labor unit in each local country gets greater power, and has reason to want to raise benefits elsewhere to keep standards and costs even across the planet.
Marx's theory was that things wouldn't get bad enough for the revolution until workers across the world were under corporate thumbs, as I just said in different terms, above. He did not 'advocate' withering of the state, but predicted that that was how things would get so bad for the average worker that revolution became a necessity.
In other words, he agreed that globalism is bad for the workers.
2007-09-30 12:01:18 · answer #3 · answered by DAR 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
An actual Marxist supports the statement, "Workers of the world unite," and believes in the eventual withering away of the state. You're correct. Your wife's attitude is socialist, not Marxist.
2007-09-30 10:50:03 · answer #4 · answered by Thomas M 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
mass low-skilled immigration is the WMD in the class war - by the Elites against the masses.
But you wouldn't be their only useful idiot - the left across the western world - particularly in Europe - has sold out the native proles in the hope of ethnic support in the future.
2007-09-30 19:41:25 · answer #5 · answered by celvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Marx was a capitalist...Of course he was in favor of cheap labor...Consider a company such as Wal-Mart, which probably has the most employees worldwide...They are providing jobs, but they are mostly minimum wage jobs...These jobs are more beneficial for the company than they are for the worker...
2007-09-30 10:05:24 · answer #6 · answered by Terry C. 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, because that would make you more than a Marxist. It would make you a traitor to your country.
God Bless America
2007-10-01 11:17:00 · answer #7 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we do not want illegals here. it is a federal offense for any one, company or religious group to harbor illegals. it can get them 5 to 10 years in prison. it is against the law to encourage illegals to come here illegally. it can get a person 5 to 10 years in prison. and yes it hurts us citizens when they come here and take our jobs. we lose good paying jobs to illegals that bring wages down. you don't deserve your wife, NO?
2007-09-30 11:12:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What the hell are you talking about? Most of the US is proletarian! you ignorant racist, and screw the illegal criminals who steal jobs from the proletarian
2007-09-30 11:06:14 · answer #9 · answered by ST 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
no actually your full of it have fun in jail where i live there are many robbing stealing making life difficult to come to america you do it legally other wise stay home and try making your world better
2007-09-30 10:22:02 · answer #10 · answered by pugs5678 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋