On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 3:18 PM, Anthony D'Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have to disagree on the last point on mass immigration. Mobility should > be a birth right, within and outside borders (and borders of the periphery > themselves are an unfortunate product of imperialism), although managed > flows of people is generally preferable by most constituencies. Admittedly, > mass immigration from a particular place is a reflection of failure of the > national economy. But the ability of nations (governments) to transform > their economy is easily said than done. So why not make it easier for > people to find ways to seek a better life, whatever that might, instead of > erecting barriers on left-nationalist grounds. I agree completely. Anti-immigration idealogy essentially seeks to turn the Western world into one giant gated community. The idea of permanent nation-states with sovereign control over fixed borders is possibly the most destructive and inhuman concept from the age of imperialism. It has divided people up into arbitrary groups, restricted their freedom to move around, caused border disputes, wars and ethnic conflicts, and brainwashed people into believing that it is worthwhile to give their life for the "national interest". It is quite amazing how readily people accept these ideas today as if it was the most natural and reasonable thing in the world. -raghu. -- Don't drink and drive. You might hit a bump and spill your drink.
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
