Industrial Workers of the World Opposes... Nothing!
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
May 1st - Defend the Rights of Immigrant Workers
Whereas: the working class knows no borders or races, but exists wherever workers are exploited for the benefit of capital; and
Whereas: all human beings are entitled to the means of obtaining the necessities of life for themselves and their families, regardless of any artificial barriers created by government; and
Whereas: the nature of capitalist economies is to draw workers from all over to the centers of capitalist investment, while at the same time drawing wealth out of less-developed economies, thereby eliminating opportunities to earn a living within such economies; and
Whereas: the recent rise in immigration to the United States of America is directly attributable to this process, as exemplified by the destructive free-trade treaties forced upon Latin America by the United States government, as well as the insatiable lust of North American employers for a dependent, immigrant work-force that can be compelled to labor under sub-minimum wages and deplorable working conditions and used to undermine the working conditions of all workers; and
Whereas: all workers, wherever economic necessity may force them to seek work, are entitled to organize and take concerted, economic action for the defense and aid of their class, for which purpose the Industrial Workers of the World has sought to unite the workers of the world in One Big Union, regardless of nationality or place of origin; and
Whereas: the struggle of immigrant workers is connected and integral to the struggle of all workers for industrial freedom and economic security, which demands the solidarity of all workers, in every industry throughout the world;
Now, therefore, be it RESOLVED,
That the General Executive Board of the Industrial Workers of the World declares its opposition to efforts to prohibit or criminalize the crossing of national borders by workers, and opposes efforts to prohibit the giving of aid and comfort to immigrant workers; and be it further RESOLVED,
That, in order to advance the solidarity of all workers, and to demonstrate to the employing class that an injury to one worker is an injury to all, the General Executive Board of the Industrial Workers of the World hereby endorses the popular call for a general strike and protest in defense of immigrant workers in the United States, and calls upon all Branches and members of the Organization to participate in such a strike and protest, as local circumstances shall permit, on the first day of May 2006, the International Workers' Holiday.
GENERAL EXECUTIVE BOARD INDUSTRIAL WORKERS OF THE WORLD
5 Comments:
I've changed my mind about immigration by "illegals". The problem is borders and who controls them. The government thinks it should regulate my movements across borders; all governments think this. So, here in the USA, I can't legally go to, say, Cuba. I can be arrested. The government thinks it should force people to jump through all kinds of hoops before they enter the territory over which the government has a monopoly of force; i.e., the nation or state. Where does the government get the right to control the movements of people? One of the problems is that governments think they are still feudal states and own the territory so, therefore, they can control entry and exit. Doing away with government ownership of land and having all land privately owned would do away with border control and the problem of so-called "illegal immigrants". Just because there are laws controlling movement does not mean they are right. In fact, they are anti-liberty.
The most bizarre things, indeed...
One of the problems with illegal immigration, and a problem that is not being addressed at all, is the economy of the country from which the illegals pour through the US borders. Specifically, Mexico.
Vincente Fox is about as honest and caring an individual as GW Dubya. There are two classes in Mexico - the god awful wealthy and the god awful poor. Nothing in between. And, about five families constitute the wealthy class, of which Fox is a member.
If these two cockroach leaders worked together to even out the economics of Mexico, thereby giving Mexicans a chance of earning a reasonable living in their own country, I'd bet dollars to donuts that they'd opt to stay in Mexico. But, that's not going to happen. I suppose the rhetoric about criminalizing illegal aliens gives these asswipes some sense of superiority, but they are really criminals themselves, stealing from the poor and middle, and giving it all to themselves.
That's what needs to be talked about. Nothing will ever be solved until that basic issue is resolved.
I read an article today on this topic that I liked very much titled What Do You Mean “We”?. It was written by Sheldon Richman and can be read online at The Future of Freedom Foundation's website.
This article touches on many of the points made your comments. My own position on this topic is still unsettled. It seems that every time I read a new article, I find another problem with immigration legislation and enforcement.
For example, from the cited article we see conflict between the individual's choice to freely contract with others and government's burdensome regulations:
there is tension between the ideas that we live in a free society and that government may determine whom we may sell to, rent to, and hire. This is the real heart of the immigration debate. Who should decide such things, free individuals or the state?
He's right. Individuals have the right to contract for work without government's constant intrusion. Why does government feel the need to constantly stick it's nose into private matters. The author then points out that:
In all the blather about immigration, no one has stepped up to explain why, in what Mencken called the land of the theoretically free, individuals are not free to hire and sell and rent to whomever they wish. If I want to rent an apartment to and employ a Mexican, that’s no one’s business but my own, regardless of whether he’s cleared some arbitrary bureaucratic hurdles. The politicians should butt out, which in an earlier time was the essence of Americanism. I don’t think the government school curriculum features that very prominently.
I'm in agreement with him here. Government really does need to butt out. People, regardless of nationality, have the right to engage in trade uninhibited by government regulations. As a matter of fact, if you remove all of government's regulations, most of the arguments against "illegal" immigration disappear.
I have a hunch that the Wobblies do not believe in illegal immigration; no person is illegal and all that.
Post a Comment
<< Home