• zeezee@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 天前

    So you’re acknowledging that it’s a problem of wealth extraction but your proposed solution is for left wing parties to adopt a more anti-immigration stance instead of resolving the issue of inequality?

    Right wing parties platform on isolationist policies (Brexit) while massively boosting globalization (how there’s now more migration post-Brexit than pre) and using migrants as a scapegoat for people’s economic issues.

    Pinning the issue of globalization on migrants is like putting the blame on the exploited for the crimes of the exploiters.

    Globalization isn’t bad because it allows people to resettle, escape political and environmental instability in their own countries - but because neoliberal interests specifically funnel away wealth from their local lower classes and destabilize poorer foreign nations to provide cheap labour for their businesses at home.

    So instead of saying how great Denmark is for adopting “zero asylum” policies why not spend your energy advocating for wealth redistribution on a global scale? I agree, ideally people wouldn’t need to migrate to richer counties - but I don’t see the same “anti-globalist” parties advocating for paying reparations or providing zero debt aid to poorer nations instead either.

    Denmark’s approach seems to prioritize protecting their domestic welfare system rather than addressing the global systems that create inequality. They’ve maintained many of the same neoliberal international policies while building higher walls around their own social safety net - exemplifying a “freedom for me, but not for thee” approach.

    Which leads to the real crux of the issue - can a truly progressive approach stop at national borders, or does it require addressing the international systems that create inequality and drive migration in the first place?