159
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
159 points (89.6% liked)
World News
32317 readers
1012 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I get what you two are saying, but this kind of removes agency from the people doing the moving.
Also: Should people not be allowed to move to another country if they’re “too useful” or “skilled”?
People make their own history, but they do not make it as they please. Our material conditions limit our agency. We go where the jobs are, where the money is, where the possibilities for a better future are. Those are all choices.
But you can't ignore the material conditions that lead to those choices. We aren't just free floating agents in a sea of possibilities.
Never said they or we do
Totally agree
I think you may have misspoke. You said I'm removing their agency. I did no such thing.
Your phrasing of your first comment certainly read that way to me. I didn’t misspeak. If I did not understand your meaning/intention that’s a fair claim.
Hi, one of the people that did the move: they are absolutely right. I got through uni and masters for free at federal universities, my education is amazing. My country gets nothing back because there is no industry there that'd take me and university positions are limited.
I made the bese choice for myself and am aware of how bad my choice is for home
But I agree with you? I’m not sure what we disagree on?
That's not it, but in many cases Western imperialism is involved in the conditions that made these people want to leave in the first place.
I’m not blaming them I am saying they still often make a decision. They are humans who have some control of their lives. That’s not mutually exclusive with saying they are also pressured externally.
The way they were originally described made it sound like they are just pieces on a board incapable of deciding what they want and acting on it.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say anymore. What's the point you're trying to make here?
https://kbin.social/m/worldnews@lemmy.ml/t/1000729/-/comment/6477868
Yeah and nobody is saying they don't have agency. You're preaching to... no one?
Plenty of people seem to agree with me so the dismissive attitude is not warranted.
People don't have free agency to move to any country they want. In my view the free agency which you say is being removed never actually existed in the first place.
But I do find it funny that "give me your poor" (yes I'm borrowing from the US) turned into "give me your elite".
I didn’t say people had free agency to go to any country they want. You are presenting a false dichotomy. There are different people with different access to different places with different senses of urgency and for different reasons. Many people make choices on whether or not to immigrate, as well as where to immigrate if they choose to. They have agency, they are not just pawns in this discussion to be shuffled around.
There's no agency in the market. That's the entire point of markets - being independent of a single human's whims and being an equalizing force, the "invisible hand".
And the entire point of communism is getting that agency, having production for the sake of humans rather than humans for the sake of production.
I think you have lost the thread here tbh
No, migration is caused by economics, so it only makes sense to use economics to talk about it. In capitalism, migration follows the market laws, i.e. people migrating to where they expect to be paid more.
I took basic Econ. My point is decisions are multi-faceted. We are not all slaves of the invisible hand 24/7 as it guides our every single decision.
Idk about everyone else, but I think the issue is something like the "oh so you hate capitalism but participate in it?" meme.
An argument for agency can be made either for or against, but for most it boils down to the reality of the society you're trying to exist in. It's just a huge distraction that you've created along with others for anecdotal conversations. This is a US sitting democratic president calling insults to allies during a time-period where conflict is on the rise, while completely negating any resolutions that could impede the death being caused.
We could talk about Biden's own xenophobia with the immigration and border response. His past with the crime bill and other negative legislation. The fact that the entire Democratic Party is xenophobic to anyone outside of their party including the "poor" or progressive strangers they fear so much, like we saw with the recent condemnation of the protests against Palestinian genocide.
Instead you've made 10+ comments bringing up other countries to blame, links back to other comments in this thread, boasting about taking a basic Econ class and proclaiming you've won because a couple of people upvoted you. I understand your argument, it's just not valid at this time or during this discussion and you're trying to force it with hostility till people "get it".
I am not forcing it with hostility. I made a broader point about treating people like pawns on a board and I got lectured about econ 101. Yeah I got a little snippy with them, sure I could've not been that way. But these responses are so absurd, they leave no nuance or middleground and keep telling me I am either saying things I didn't say or put up a lazy strawman as if it responds to what I said.
Also notice not one person wants to acknowledge that there is this implication people have some obligation to not leave their country as it means they are participating in "brain drain."
I get what you're saying, I really do. But the fact is people got all prickly when I tried to introduce nuance. Of course economic factors heavily drive our decisions. I'm not sure where I said anything remotely to the contrary, so I'm getting irritated.
There's an issue without you saying not because you don't know econ 101, but because you do know it. Because you shift the focus from the systems (global imperialism) to the individuals ("so you shouldn't be allowed to migrate?"). What causes migration is, objectively, unequal development of different countries caused by imperialism and inherent to the market system, and not "personal decisions". That means shifting the talk to "personal decisions" is pointless and harmful.
It's like going "oh but you voluntarily choose to buy/sell" and blaming all your economic problems on yourself.
I didn’t shift it. I introduced nuance. Nothing I said denied the impact of imperialism/economic realities. Show me where I said anything like that. I have written several responses that clearly indicate I know those are major factors. At this point responses like yours just mean you are choosing to deliberately misinterpret what I wrote/put words in my mouth and that you are ignoring anything else I wrote that could possibly clarify the situation.
Feels like I’m back on Reddit with this nonsense.
It also has a chicken-egg problem. What if the indicators of talent or skill aren't apparent because of abysmally poor living and educational conditions? The lack of opportunity in many developing countries is such that people will be less successful and appear less talented simply because their country has limited ways for them to demonstrate it.