What is the rationale for not letting people leave?

[☭World Views]

In some countries where they claimed to promote leftism, they did not let ANYONE leave the borders by threat of death or imprisonment.


Is this exaggerated propaganda?



If not, what is the rationale for not letting people leave a country? It opens up the way for a smear campaign by the capitalist media.

[the last donut of the night]

The places you are probably referring to were state-capitalist dictatorships that instead of featuring workers' control of the state, and thus democracy, featured one-party rule and despotism. Thus these countries weren't really leftist, as they claimed. To keep people from naturally escaping, they enforced these stupid measures. It's not propaganda. Sadly, it was and is true.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

First of all, yes, it is exaggerated propaganda. People were allowed to leave from the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries - in fact, some people got kicked out, like Alexandr Soljenitsin. The truth is that it was very difficult to leave. You had to go through a lot of bureaucratic red tape, and wait for months, and your request could be denied.

The reason for it was to prevent a brain drain. The Eastern Bloc countries offered free education to everyone. They did not want their educated professionals to leave to the West, because that would have meant that the Eastern countries spent money on educating the West's scientists and doctors.

[☭World Views]

These are certainly better explanations that the "the people couldn't have afforded to leave the country for vacation or to move anyway" given by a book I have to read.

[New Tet]

If you take Cuba as an example, you've missed the mark.

In Cuba it is illegal for anyone to leave the country illegally. That is, it is against the law to emigrate secretly and without the required documents. I think the U.S. has similar laws.

But the principal reason many Cubans are denied exit from their country is not the Cuban government but U.S. immigration policy. For a variety of reasons, most Cubans want to emigrate to the U.S. But the U.S. issues visas to Cubans with the parsimony of a miser. It has done so for many years in the hope of creating enough discontent among Cubans to want to sabotage or leave their own country illegally; It's called the pressure cooker strategy.

[Outinleftfield]

First of all, yes, it is exaggerated propaganda. People were allowed to leave from the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc countries - in fact, some people got kicked out, like Alexandr Soljenitsin. The truth is that it was very difficult to leave. You had to go through a lot of bureaucratic red tape, and wait for months, and your request could be denied.

The reason for it was to prevent a brain drain. The Eastern Bloc countries offered free education to everyone. They did not want their educated professionals to leave to the West, because that would have meant that the Eastern countries spent money on educating the West's scientists and doctors.

Hit the nail on the head. The truth is that this wasn't just done by so-called communist countries. Some capitalist states such as S. Korea also denied people's requests to leave.

[StalinFanboy]

In Cuba it is illegal for anyone to leave the country illegally.
It is illegal in most places to do things illegally.

[New Tet]

It is illegal in most places to do things illegally.

Thank you for pointing out the redundant and absurd. I hope you read the sentence that followed it which makes more sense and clarifies the error.

What i meant to say is that in Cuba, as in any other nation state today, there are laws that restrict, impede and control the free movement of citizen and non-citizen.

To expect that Cuba make this or that migratory reform without demanding that the U.S. abolish, change or reform its own established policies of immigration with regard to Cuba is hypocritical.

BTW, if you had been more alert you would have caught this:


...For a variety of reasons, most Cubans want to emigrate to the U.S...Which would be factually wrong if taken at face value. Instead I meant or should have written: "For a variety of reasons, most Cubans who want to emigrate, want go to the U.S..."

[manic expression]

New Tet's posts are very helpful here. By the way, I once met a Russian woman who legally emigrated from the Soviet Union to the US in the 70's. She was an engineer, in case anyone's curious.

[Bright Banana Beard]

I also have a similar case with manic expression, I have a Russian math teacher who emigrate from USSR in 1950s.

[MarxSchmarx]

But the principal reason many Cubans are denied exit from their country is not the Cuban government but U.S. immigration policy. For a variety of reasons, most Cubans want to emigrate to the U.S. But the U.S. issues visas to Cubans with the parsimony of a miser. It has done so for many years in the hope of creating enough discontent among Cubans to want to sabotage or leave their own country illegally; It's called the pressure cooker strategy.


Unfortunately, Cuba is the exception that proves the rule. All Cuban refugees, once they reach US soil, are by law considered legitimate asylum seekers and are immediately granted a US green card, unlike asylum seekers from, say, the Haiti. The US govn't bends over backwards to show that it welcomes ANY dissent from Cuba, a courtesy not extended to any other capitalist country.

[What Would Durruti Do?]

Same reasons any state restricts the rights of it's people: paranoia and exploitation

[NecroCommie]

It is illegal in most places to do things illegally.
'yelp' :ohmy:

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Mark Steel had a great line about East Germany: "The most obvious puzzle about this model society was that if it was so splendid, why did they need a bloody great wall to keep people in it. If you threw a party and found the guests secretly constructing a hot air balloon in a desperate attempt to escape, you wouldn't conclude that this proved the night was a success."

[Bandito]

The truth is that it was very difficult to leave. You had to go through a lot of bureaucratic red tape, and wait for months, and your request could be denied.
Can anyone see the difference between this and current capitalist states that require visas for foreigners?

[Bright Banana Beard]

Mark Steel had a great line about East Germany: "The most obvious puzzle about this model society was that if it was so splendid, why did they need a bloody great wall to keep people in it. If you threw a party and found the guests secretly constructing a hot air balloon in a desperate attempt to escape, you wouldn't conclude that this proved the night was a success."

The wall was built to stop the West Germany denizen to take free stuff from the East Germany. Do you seriously think that socialism in one country has ulitmate resource for everyone? No.

Seriously, think about the West sending all those people to East Germany for free healthcare, free education (sending student to the East while they live in the West), cheap price of food in East (West does have some expensive food but in the East, they are controlled by the evil bougeoise government), etc., are they able to handle this massive stealing capity? No.

Next question beside calling me evil Leninist?

[The Ungovernable Farce]

The wall was built to stop the West Germany denizen to take free stuff from the East Germany. Do you seriously think that socialism in one country has ulitmate resource for everyone? No.

Seriously, think about the West sending all those people to East Germany for free healthcare, free education (sending student to the East while they live in the West), cheap price of food in East (West does have some expensive food but in the East, they are controlled by the evil bougeoise government), etc., are they able to handle this massive stealing capity? No.

Next question beside calling me evil Leninist?
Why do you sound exactly like the English nationalists who complain about foreigners coming over here to take advantage of our generosity and wonderful way of life? Seriously, replace "East Germany" with "the USA" and "Westerners" with "Mexicans" and I reckon you could get a slot on Fox News.
Also, if the wall was built to stop Westerners getting in, then does that mean that East Germans were free to pass through and leave whenever they wanted?

[bailey_187]

Why do you sound exactly like the English nationalists who complain about foreigners coming over here to take advantage of our generosity and wonderful way of life? Seriously, replace "East Germany" with "the USA" and "Westerners" with "Mexicans" and I reckon you could get a slot on Fox News.
Also, if the wall was built to stop Westerners getting in, then does that mean that East Germans were free to pass through and leave whenever they wanted?

Brilliant. Make a shit analogy rather than argue the point.

[Bright Banana Beard]

Why do you sound exactly like the English nationalists who complain about foreigners coming over here to take advantage of our generosity and wonderful way of life? Seriously, replace "East Germany" with "the USA" and "Westerners" with "Mexicans" and I reckon you could get a slot on Fox News.
Also, if the wall was built to stop Westerners getting in, then does that mean that East Germans were free to pass through and leave whenever they wanted?

It is logical fallacy to replace the term with the other term either way. Otherwise, you are saying I should let everbody get in my house? No.

In reality, the people isn't kept inside at all, they are able to move as long they have paper, of course.

The East Germany impose border checks on the wall and to stop the people from the West Germany taking advangate of the East Germany's free stuff. It was built in 1961, before that people from the West and the East can cross easily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_border_crossings

And secondly, Mark Steel ignored the reality of the Cold War struggle. The fact that he did not include it make this quote idealistic. Do I support the wall? No. It is unfortunately? Yes. We all wanted to freely travel, but the continous assault on the progression on proletarians made this hard to do so.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

It is logical fallacy to replace the term with the other term either way. Otherwise, you are saying I should let everbody get in my house? No.
No, that's an analogy that is not very accurate, because your house does not resemble a nation-state. I was just pointing out how much the nationalism promoted by one nation-state resembles the nationalism promoted by another nation-state. It's an accurate analogy, and so perfectly justified.


In reality, the people isn't kept inside at all, they are able to move as long they have paper, of course.

The East Germany impose border checks on the wall and to stop the people from the West Germany taking advangate of the East Germany's free stuff. It was built in 1961, before that people from the West and the East can cross easily.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_border_crossings

If we're gonna bring wikipedia into it, how about this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall)?


Prior to the Wall's erection, 3.5 million East Germans had avoided Eastern Bloc emigration restrictions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Bloc_emigration_and_defection) to escape into West Germany, many over the border between East and West Berlin. During its existence from 1961 to 1989, the Wall stopped most such emigration and separated East Germany from West Germany for more than a quarter of a century...[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-0) After its erection, around 5,000 people attempted to escape circumventing the wall, with figures of the resulting death toll varying between 98 and 200.
During a revolutionary wave sweeping across the Eastern Bloc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutions_of_1989), the East German government announced on November 9, 1989, after several weeks of civil unrest, that all GDR citizens could visit West Germany and West Berlin. Crowds of East Germans climbed onto and crossed the wall, joined by West Germans on the other side in a celebratory atmosphere...
After Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe at the end of World War II, the majority of those living in the newly acquired areas of the Eastern Bloc (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Bloc) aspired to independence and wanted the Soviets to leave.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-thackeray188-19) Taking advantage of the zonal border between occupied zones in Germany, the number of GDR citizens moving to West Germany totaled 197,000 in 1950, 165,000 in 1951, 182,000 in 1952 and 331,000 in 1953.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-20)[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-loescher60-21) One reason for the sharp 1953 increase was fear of potential further Sovietization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovietization) with the increasingly paranoid actions of Joseph Stalin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin) in late 1952 and early 1953.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-loescher68-22) 226,000 had fled in just the first six months of 1953...[24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-dale17-23)
The border between the Western and Eastern sectors of Berlin, however, remained open, although traffic between the Soviet and the Western sectors was somewhat restricted. This resulted in Berlin becoming a magnet for East Germans desperate to escape life in the GDR, and also a flashpoint for tension between the superpowers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower) - the United States and the Soviet Union...
When large numbers of East Germans then defected under the guise of "visits", the new East German state essentially eliminated all travel to the west in 1956.[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-dowty121-26) Soviet East German ambassador Mikhail Pervukhin observed that "the presence in Berlin of an open and essentially uncontrolled border between the socialist and capitalist worlds unwittingly prompts the population to make a comparison between both parts of the city, which unfortunately, does not always turn out in favor of the Democratic [East] Berlin."[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-harrison99-29)
With the closing of the inner German border (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_German_border) officially in 1952,[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-harrison99-29) the border in Berlin remained considerably more accessible than the rest of the border because it was administered by all four occupying powers.[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-dowty121-26) Accordingly, Berlin became the main route by which East Germans left for the West.[31] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-30) East Germany introduced a new passport law on December 11, 1957 that reduced the overall number of refugees leaving Eastern Germany, while drastically increasing the percentage of those leaving through West Berlin from 60% to well over 90% by the end of 1958.[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-harrison99-29) Those actually caught trying to leave East Berlin were subjected to heavy penalties, but with no physical barrier and even subway train access to West Berlin, such measures were ineffective.[32] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-dowty122-31)
The Berlin sector border was essentially a "loophole" through which East Bloc citizens could still escape.[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-harrison99-29) The 3.5 million East Germans that had left by 1961 totaled approximately 20% of the entire East German population.[32] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-dowty122-31)
By 1960, the combination of World War II and the massive emigration westward left East Germany with only 61% of its population of working age, compared to 70.5% before the war...
Due to the closure of the East-West sector boundary in Berlin, the vast majority of East Germans could no longer travel or emigrate to West Germany...
The East German government claimed that the Wall was an "anti-fascist protective rampart" ("antifaschistischer Schutzwall") intended to dissuade aggression from the West [39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-38). Another official justification was the activities of western agents in Eastern Europe [40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-39). A yet different explanation was that West Berliners were buying out state-subsidized goods in East Berlin. Most of these positions were, however, viewed with skepticism even in East Germany, even more so since most of the time, the border was only closed for citizens of East Germany traveling to the West, but not for residents of West Berlin traveling to the East[41] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall#cite_note-40). The construction of the Wall had caused considerable hardship to families divided by it, and the view that the Wall was mainly a means of preventing the citizens of East Germany from entering West Berlin or fleeing was widely accepted.
How does any of this fit with your bizarre, absurd assertion that the wall was to keep Westerners out, not to keep Easterners in? Why did the term Republikflucht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republikflucht) exist to describe people trying to get out of East Germany, not people trying to get into it?



And secondly, Mark Steel ignored the reality of the Cold War struggle. The fact that he did not include it make this quote idealistic. Do I support the wall? No. It is unfortunately? Yes. We all wanted to freely travel, but the continous assault on the progression on proletarians made this hard to do so.
I think that the reason so many East Germans were so keen to freely travel (so much so that they ended up tearing the wall down) was precisely because of the continuous assault on proletarians being waged by the East German ruling class.

[Bright Banana Beard]

No, that's an analogy that is not very accurate, because your house does not resemble a nation-state. I was just pointing out how much the nationalism promoted by one nation-state resembles the nationalism promoted by another nation-state. It's an accurate analogy, and so perfectly justified. No, your analogy is totally bullshit, without any support whatsoever. Second, analogy is STILL LOGICAL FALLACY and IT IS NEVER JUSTIFIED.


If we're gonna bring Wikipedia into it, how about this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Wall)? Fuck wikipedia. If you check out the source, it fucking bizarre to include the USA and Times Magazine. I mean really, what the fuck? How about the author who include interview with the official figure rather than making up your own agenda for fuck sake. You trying to provoke me to go into wikipedia war against you. Stop that attitude.


How does any of this fit with your bizarre, absurd assertion that the wall was to keep Westerners out, not to keep Easterners in? Why did the term Republikflucht (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republikflucht) exist to describe people trying to get out of East Germany, not people trying to get into it? Oh! I supposed to get scared with the word BIZARRE and ABSURB? Check my message when I never include those stupid useless adjective and now you inject it. Fucking great. Grow up and quit fucking crying. I knew many East German able to visit West Germany before the wall collapsed. And this isn't Wikipedia, my friend. Try not to pull information from Wikipedia.



I think that the reason so many East Germans were so keen to freely travel (so much so that they ended up tearing the wall down) was precisely because of the continuous assault on proletarians being waged by the East German ruling class. Indeed, the continuous assault is waged by ruling class in West Germany and East Germany, this is nothing surprising since the revisionism allowed the ruling class to have more power for themselves and disconnect themselves from the working class.

[The Ungovernable Farce]

Second, analogy is STILL LOGICAL FALLACY and IT IS NEVER JUSTIFIED.
No analogy is EVER justified, EVER. Ok.

Fuck wikipedia. If you check out the source, it fucking bizarre to include the USA and Times Magazine. I mean really, what the fuck? How about the author who include interview with the official figure rather than making up your own agenda for fuck sake. You trying to provoke me to go into wikipedia war against you. Stop that attitude. I'm just sayin', since you provided that link to wikipedia, which kind of suggested you thought it was a reliable source. If you hate wikipedia so much, why did you give that link? Is this also "Amerikkkan propaganda (http://www.stmas.bayern.de/migration/aussiedler/aussstat.pdf)"?
Do you want to go through Thackeray, Frank W. (2004), Events that changed Germany, Dowty, Alan (1989), Closed Borders: The Contemporary Assault on Freedom of Movement and Harrison, Hope Millard (2003), Driving the Soviets Up the Wall: Soviet-East German Relations, 1953-1961 explaining why they're flawed? What sources have you provided to support your implausible claims which are obviously not true in any universe even vaguely resembling this one?

Oh! I supposed to get scared with the word BIZARRE and ABSURB?
I wasn't trying to scare you, I was just trying to point out how absurd your bizarre assertions are.

Check my message when I never include those stupid useless adjective and now you inject it. Fucking great. Grow up and quit fucking crying.
I'm certainly not crying. If anything, I'm closer to lolling at the wonderful world of Stalinist mythology. Are you seriously, genuinely trying to tell me that the Berlin Wall was to keep Westerners from getting in, not to stop Easterners escaping?


Indeed, the continuous assault is waged by ruling class in West Germany and East Germany, this is nothing surprising since the revisionism allowed the ruling class to have more power for themselves and disconnect themselves from the working class.
So if you admit that the state capitalism of the Eastern Bloc was just another form of class rule that had nothing to do with genuine socialism, why are you still trying to defend it?

[Bright Banana Beard]

I'm certainly not crying. If anything, I'm closer to lolling at the wonderful world of Stalinist mythology. Are you seriously, genuinely trying to tell me that the Berlin Wall was to keep Westerners from getting in, not to stop Easterners escaping?Secondly, I just a Marxist-Leninist but whatever. The reason Easterner escaping the East is to due the policy of the West Germany giving the East citizen good income and not to the West citiezen thanks to the Marshall Plan. This is why we are seeing brain drain, the capitalist will attempt to do anything to destroy the "socialist" state.


So if you admit that the state capitalism of the Eastern Bloc was just another form of class rule that had nothing to do with genuine socialism, why are you still trying to defend it? You, like other liberal and ultra-leftists, tends to think that we think any socialist state is "glorious, perfect, paradise, etc." Which is stupid, unfound, and a good way to roll back your "machoism." And this isn't how we roll, we only defend the gains of the proletarian and let the ruling class mentality suffers big time. The reason we preferred them is: They forbid private property (most important element), the workers has more say than any capitalist nation and more secure, the policy of the "socialist" ensures the civilian will have their life fairness. However, we will always supports socialist proletarian revolution and not from whoever want to be "peaceful and friendship" with the Western nation. Do we wanted to renew those socialist states? No, we do not. The reality tainted the theory either way.