When it comes to immigration, it’s hard to have an opinion that’s out of line with the thinking of liberal bourgeoisie WITHOUT being labeled A) racist, B) reactionary, C) xenophobe, or D) all of the above. Furthermore, it’s even harder to have the discussion while trying to remove it from the context of one’s own country, and look at immigration for what it really is – a question of sustainable economic and social policy.
At its very core, immigration can be best understood as population policy. As such, if stripped of all ideals, slogans and associated philosophies, it often times boils down to a matter of resources, though certainly not entirely to the exclusion of other matters. The use of publicly available resources, whether natural or synthetic, human or material, etc. is not without limitations, costs and consequences. An open-door immigration policy is thus population policy out of control.
The resource question in regards to immigration is further obfuscated in liberal capitalist countries like the United States, where resources are utilized and exploited by the private ownership classes. In such cases, immigration boils down to economics, but seen on an entirely different plane. For the capitalist, waves of immigrants are sources for both exploitable labor and consumers in the market.
Further complicating this matter still remains the issue of the State, and its role in society. In the United States, the Federal government assumes largely an administrative/executive role, one largely focused on maintaining the economic and social status quo for the benefit of the ownership class. Whereas in other countries, contemporary and historic, the State has assumed a more active, leading role in directing and shaping society.
But for post-capitalist societies, whereupon the complete socialization of the means of production and resources has occurred, immigration will not be a matter of simply allowing for a broader consumer market or a source of cheap labor. Within such societies, the people become a completely socialized community– whereby individual members are educated to see themselves and dedicate their lives for the collective good. Out-of-control immigration policies once again revert back to the question of resource. In economies structured on the principal, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his work,” society has a vested interest in maintaining the use of public resources (including services and goods) for dedicated and committed members of the community.
While the possibility of immigrants becoming ideologically suitable and contributing members of the community is certainly not excluded, as a general approach, immigration policy in a socialist society should be highly selective and exclusionary. Not only is this necessary for the required social, political, and cultural cohesion to drive society towards its inevitable and historical ends; but, it’s also a genuine matter of security.
For these very reasons, methods of domestic restrictions must also be implemented. Citizens who refuse to work and contribute must not receive the benefits of the collectivist society. Habitual criminals, asocial types, members of the former exploiting class and political enemies must be isolated from the community and removed in order to neutralize the myriad threats they pose.