In response to my posting about slavery and underpaid immigrant labor I received this comment:
"I actually don't see them as very similar.
A couple differences immediately jump to mind.
1) Immigrants choose to travel to the country they reside in.
2) Immigrants are allowed to leave at any time.
3) Immigrants (in the USA) remit billions of dollars back to their countries thus benefiting the economies of their home countries."
I wanted to clarify. My father was talking about underpaid immigrant labor not in the USA. In some countries he mentioned there are situations where people chose to travel to the country (see point 1) to work to earn money to send to their families, or remittances (see point 2) and were allowed to leave at any time (see point 3). And then, the wages fell for them (anulling point 3), and the legal situation was construed in a way to make it difficult for them to leave (anulling point 2). Now, I don't know the details. But, I thought that this blog might be a good forum to get some feedback to him on his ideas. I guess what I take away is that 3 the good indicators for slavery mentioned above fit. As for the point 1, I guess that is still true in the case of underpaid migrant workers. However, there are many forms of slavery where migrants who by their status of economic refugees are especially vulnerable people. This is taken advantage of by predatory employers.
This applies even to the folks who fall squarely under the other 3 points, as described by my other commenter, here it is if you haven't read it:
"Anybody working in a capitalist system is nothing but a wage slave. Unfortunately undocumented immigrants are at the bottom of this system. Not only are they threatened like all of us by the risks and instability of the job market but their control is further reduced by having to use false pretenses to gain employment. Not to mention that their labor is generally limited to unskilled labor and service industries. Even if they are here legally and they have an education they are usually limited in their ability to gain skilled/professional employment by language barriers or lack of certifications valid in the U.S."
Over a century and a half ago our country suffered a war over, among other things, just this sort of issue. The Union forces, and their ideological backers were praised by none other than Karl Marx, who saw this transition of so many slaves to wage-slaves as causing them to join the proletariat and revolting. Well, he was over-optimistic about this and could not foresee that emancipation was only the beginning of the path toward equality, and that brotherhood within the US proletariat would not be the same as the nationalistic proletarian movements he had been a part of. Doesn't that kind of talk sound corny and out-dated in today's USA?
I agree with my dad, there are other places where immigrant labor has it much worse off. But, also believe that in the US we believe all men are created equal, and that the downtrodden are welcome here.
So, comments? What does this mean for undocumented labor and immigration reform?
"I actually don't see them as very similar.
A couple differences immediately jump to mind.
1) Immigrants choose to travel to the country they reside in.
2) Immigrants are allowed to leave at any time.
3) Immigrants (in the USA) remit billions of dollars back to their countries thus benefiting the economies of their home countries."
I wanted to clarify. My father was talking about underpaid immigrant labor not in the USA. In some countries he mentioned there are situations where people chose to travel to the country (see point 1) to work to earn money to send to their families, or remittances (see point 2) and were allowed to leave at any time (see point 3). And then, the wages fell for them (anulling point 3), and the legal situation was construed in a way to make it difficult for them to leave (anulling point 2). Now, I don't know the details. But, I thought that this blog might be a good forum to get some feedback to him on his ideas. I guess what I take away is that 3 the good indicators for slavery mentioned above fit. As for the point 1, I guess that is still true in the case of underpaid migrant workers. However, there are many forms of slavery where migrants who by their status of economic refugees are especially vulnerable people. This is taken advantage of by predatory employers.
This applies even to the folks who fall squarely under the other 3 points, as described by my other commenter, here it is if you haven't read it:
"Anybody working in a capitalist system is nothing but a wage slave. Unfortunately undocumented immigrants are at the bottom of this system. Not only are they threatened like all of us by the risks and instability of the job market but their control is further reduced by having to use false pretenses to gain employment. Not to mention that their labor is generally limited to unskilled labor and service industries. Even if they are here legally and they have an education they are usually limited in their ability to gain skilled/professional employment by language barriers or lack of certifications valid in the U.S."
Over a century and a half ago our country suffered a war over, among other things, just this sort of issue. The Union forces, and their ideological backers were praised by none other than Karl Marx, who saw this transition of so many slaves to wage-slaves as causing them to join the proletariat and revolting. Well, he was over-optimistic about this and could not foresee that emancipation was only the beginning of the path toward equality, and that brotherhood within the US proletariat would not be the same as the nationalistic proletarian movements he had been a part of. Doesn't that kind of talk sound corny and out-dated in today's USA?
I agree with my dad, there are other places where immigrant labor has it much worse off. But, also believe that in the US we believe all men are created equal, and that the downtrodden are welcome here.
So, comments? What does this mean for undocumented labor and immigration reform?