On Alien Amnesty

Interesting how things are heating up about this. I really can't believe this whole wall across Texas and New Mex and AZ. Where have we seen this before? That is so 1989.

Alien amnesty will happen for the simple reason that the forces of capitalism favor it, and I don't see special interest legislation overriding it. The free flow of goods in our global economy requires the free flow of its most important commodity: labor power. This is the key commodity and often only power we as workers have to offer in this exchange game. As the engines of capital continue to turn, the need for labor persists, even and especially with the rise of a service economy which provides the backbone for the much-touted information economy. The corollary to free trade is the free crossing of borders, one won't work long without the other. Our economies have always been global, so fears of "outsourcing" and the "loss" of jobs overseas are equally silly.*

It's interesting, though, the bipartisan ideological contradiction. Many conservatives advocate free trade (think NAFTA), seeing, often rightly, the possibility of continued US economic growth and dominance, the chance to exploit untapped markets, the change to keep developing nations in a chokehold of dependence. These same folk oppose alien amnesty, sometimes under economic guise ("they're taking our jobs") and often for racial and nationalistic reasons ("they're taking our jobs"). They thereby limit the free flow of our key commodity.

Liberals talk more of "fair trade" and the role of government regulation to ensure empowerment of developing nations. Sometimes this involves tariffs or subsidies (conservatives certainly use these means too when it serves their interests--but here I'm addressing their rhetoric), thereby lessening the freedom of the flow of goods. Yet such progressives often advocate for amnesty and--also along culturalist lines--the social and political inclusion of such migrant workers. Here they help grease the wheels of economy through the free flow of labor power.

It seems a bit ironic that both sides straddle and therefore gridlock the process. Perhaps one side needs to go whole hog and advocate an economically consistent position.




--
On a somewhat related note, it is funny to me what constitutes legality and illegality in this case. To be legal, one has to have submitted oneself to our bureaucracy. Their "crime" is failing to stand in line, fill out paperwork, and deal with government personnel who are guaranteed to be in the best of moods. Think of your last trip to the DMV-- fun stuff; it seems our quest for legality for our across the border brethren is making sure they too have experienced this joy of joys.

----
On a somewhat somewhat related note. There was some senator or congressman who proposed legislation to make it a capital offense --punishable by fines and jail time-- for anyone to offer aid to illegals. Anyone who aided and abetted them, like thru shelter or material goods or jobs or whatever, would be a major criminal. I kind of hope such legislation will get passed so I can have a clear guideline for what it means to be a Christian. As soon as that law goes into effect I'm hitting the street to find the first illegal immigrant and I'm going to help the hell out of them. It would only be a dim, dim echo of Le Chambon, but it would still give a nice signal for a clear cut way to live the gospel in a mad, mad world.

-----
* Let's not forget that the U.S. economy would be fundamentally different, indeed irretrievably irrecognizable, without the "outsourcing" of labor from Africa during its inception. We've always been global, baby.