Illegal Immigration and the Berlin Wall

[Weezer]

A parallel and double standard I noticed today -

So, American reactionaries are completely fine with building a wall to "protect" our borders from illegal(cough cough "brown people") immigrants, but the Berlin Wall, a wall designed to keep Neo-Nazis and other trouble makers of out East Berlin and East Germany, is a crime against humanity?

More people have been shot have been shot at the US - Mexico Border (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migrant_deaths_along_the_Mexico_%E2%80%93_United_S tates_border) than at the Berlin Wall.

Thoughts?

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

They have never really been known for their stunning ability to come to logical conclusions, have they?

[Sugarnotch]

What is your guys' opinions on immigration in the US, anyways?

I think it's abolutely stupid that people are branded "illegal" because of their birthplace and some arbitrary lines in the sand. At the same time, fully open borders would drive down wages; indeed, border control is arguably the one the largest regulation on the market today. Although you also have to consider the lump of labor fallacy which might help sustain current wages, even if the borders were completely open.

By all means, I wish the borders could be totally open. But pragmatically speaking, is that feasible within the capitalist paradigm? What do you all think?

[Tommy4ever]

You really believe it was an Anti-Fascist Protection Wall? :laugh:

The Berlin Wall was to keep people in, not out.

[hatzel]

You really believe it was an Anti-Fascist Protection Wall? :laugh:

The Berlin Wall was to keep people in, not out.

inb4 somebody starts accusing you of just parroting bourgeois propaganda lies, rather than pseudo-proletarian propaganda lies :rolleyes:

[Per Levy]

but the Berlin Wall, a wall designed to keep Neo-Nazis and other trouble makers of out East Berlin and East Germany, is a crime against humanity?

yeah, tommy4ever is right, the wall was not build to keep people out but inside the gdr, because before that a lot of gdr citizens, many studied people, fled the gdr. with the wall they tried to put an end to this.

that of course doesnt mean that what happening on the us/mexican border is anything better, not at all. but you really shouldnt defend the berlin wall in order to attack the these terrible crimes, because the berlin wall was bad.

[ArrowLance]

yeah, tommy4ever is right, the wall was not build to keep people out but inside the gdr, because before that a lot of gdr citizens, many studied people, fled the gdr. with the wall they tried to put an end to this.

that of course doesnt mean that what happening on the us/mexican border is anything better, not at all. but you really shouldnt defend the berlin wall in order to attack the these terrible crimes, because the berlin wall was bad.

Not at all, but defending the Berlin wall as a tool of the proletariat I can do.

The Berlin wall was not exactly bad. It was a stabilizing feature as well as something important for the security and lives of east German citizens. If all trained personel fled any country things would collapse. Specifically it is bad when trained citizens join an enemy of the working class in an attempt to destroy that which is important.

[Nox]

You really believe it was an Anti-Fascist Protection Wall? :laugh:

The Berlin Wall was to keep people in, not out.

You're right. It was build during the reign of the revisionists. Revisionism turned the Soviet Union into a brutal State Capitalist regime, of course people hated it and wanted to leave. :thumbup1:

[Tommy4ever]

You're right. It was build during the reign of the revisionists. Revisionism turned the Soviet Union into a brutal State Capitalist regime, of course people hated it and wanted to leave. :thumbup1:

There are so many ludicrous things here I don't know what to say.

First off, it wasn't Soviets who were leaving - it was East Germans, more specifically skilled workers and intellectuals. These people could live much better in the West and they knew it, leaving through Berlin in their hundreds of thousands. It was basically crippling East Germany, and was making the whole Eastern Bloc look very bad (this was the time when the Soviets were still trying to convince everyone that living standards were better in the East than in the West).

You do realise that Khruschev and his revisionists did not make the Soviet Union more authoritarian but considerably less authoritarian. The collapse of the gulag population in just a few years after the death of Stalin testifies to that.

The Anti-Revisionist criticisms of Khruschev centre around more ideological points (like the abandonment of class struggle ideology), some failed economic policies, foriegn policy (peaceful coexistance), the denounciation of Stalin and the evolution of the Soviet Union into a Imperial power alongside the US (although many, including myself, would argue this had already occured under Stalin).

None of those things instantly turned Russia into a 'Revisionist Hell', indeed living conditions improved noticeably under Khruschev.

It is also noticeable that dissatisfaction in East Germany didn't start after the 'revisionists' took power. The Berlin Uprising (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin_Uprising) happened just a few short months after Stalin's death, whislt the Brain Drain (the problem that the Wall was employed to solve) had been an ongoing problem for years before Stalin died.

[thesadmafioso]

You know your doing socialism right when you need to build a medieval sort of wall to protect it from the capitalists. Quite the internationalist move really, physically walling in revolution as opposed to making an active effort to encourage its emergence elsewhere.

I am fully aware that the propaganda efforts that went into making West Germany and West Berlin out to look like capitalist paradises were immense and that it was a daunting task for East Germany to shield itself from the sprawling cultural hegemony of capitalism, but I still can't get over the concept of preparing a physical wall around a revolutionary state, even if it was a deformed one.

[blake 3:17]

I am fully aware that the propaganda efforts that went into making West Germany and West Berlin out to look like capitalist paradises were immense and that it was a daunting task for East Germany to shield itself from the sprawling cultural hegemony of capitalism, but I still can't get over the concept of preparing a physical wall around a revolutionary state, even if it was a deformed one.

????

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

You know your doing socialism right when you need to build a medieval sort of wall to protect it from the capitalists. Quite the internationalist move really, physically walling in revolution as opposed to making an active effort to encourage its emergence elsewhere.

I am fully aware that the propaganda efforts that went into making West Germany and West Berlin out to look like capitalist paradises were immense and that it was a daunting task for East Germany to shield itself from the sprawling cultural hegemony of capitalism, but I still can't get over the concept of preparing a physical wall around a revolutionary state, even if it was a deformed one.

There was only a wall in Berlin, though. The rest was fence or such.

Anyway it was all because of the incompetent and absurd agreements at the Potsdam conference which should not have been respected or recognised.

[Adil3tr]

People became educated in the GDR, then moved to West Germany to make more money. It makes sense to put up barriers to that. Unfortunately they took that literally. We could have a similar problem soon with China.

[ColonelCossack]

I have tried telling that to people.

They just do this :sneaky: and walk away.

[Per Levy]

Not at all, but defending the Berlin wall as a tool of the proletariat I can do.

the problem is just, the berlin wall was no tool of the proletariat. it was a tool for the ruling party the keep the east germans inside east germany.


The Berlin wall was not exactly bad. It was a stabilizing feature as well as something important for the security and lives of east German citizens.yeah, try to tell that to the east german workers, they hated the berlin wall, they still do.


There was only a wall in Berlin, though. The rest was fence or such. it was more then just fence though, watchtowers and mines and guards were also there.

[thesadmafioso]

There was only a wall in Berlin, though. The rest was fence or such.

Anyway it was all because of the incompetent and absurd agreements at the Potsdam conference which should not have been respected or recognised.

Perhaps Stalin should of been a bit less concerned with rubbing elbows with the leaders of the capitalist west and put some effort into promoting an actual internationalist socialist movement.

Then maybe we wouldn't have such bourgeois diplomatic constructs to worry around, and we could of seen an actual emergence of socialism. Stalin was more or less trying to spread 'socialism' through standard diplomatic negotiations with the representatives of capitalism when he should of been encouraging the workers of those nations to rise up and make globe spanning revolution.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

People became educated in the GDR, then moved to West Germany to make more money. It makes sense to put up barriers to that. Unfortunately they took that literally. We could have a similar problem soon with China.

Except no one would go to China to get free and good education. You can't get that in China. Just like no one would go to China to get free health care.