After reading my post about the death of Fordism, David Bellamy asked:
On of the reasons for attracting immigrants to first world countries is precisely – as I suspected – because their presence is likely to dilute the resistance to post-Fordism.
Then why are Repubenrons trying so fiercely to limit immigration?
I was going to address this later, but since the question has been asked – and it’s an absolutely crucial question – I will discuss this now.
David is absolutely right: the trend of admitting (thank you for the correction, reader V) immigrants into a country in order to dilute any possibility of resistance or discontent with the advent of post-Fordism belongs to Western Europe and Canada much more than to the US.
The reason for this is that there is already within the US a large group of people who are the emotional equivalent of immigrants.
Deeply alienated from the mainstream culture in the US, incapable of understanding the TV shows the majority watches, the books on the best-seller lists and the laws governing the majority’s lives, speaking its own language, clinging desperately to outdated ultra-patriarchal structures common to Third World countries, suspicious of any governmental institution, insular, isolated, confused, often very angry at the incomprehensible world that is so different from everything they find familiar and comforting – I could be describing an immigrant* or an ultra-conservative American Evangelical.
As long as it is possible to keep this group as isolated, confused and scared as it is right now, there will be no need to look for any other group to dilute social resistance to post-Fordism.
Of course, the question here is the following: is the death of Fordism a fully negative phenomenon? Is post-Fordism a regressive trend?
Or – and this is the most interesting issue to ponder – are these ultra-conservative forces unwittingly assisting the advent of a more progressive era?
Isn’t it fascinating to consider whether, ultimately, the Occupy movement is defending an outdated, hierarchical, socially very conservative system while the Evangelicals are smoothing the way for a system that is more flexible, less hierarchical, and explosively progressive socially?
*Yes, not immigrants are like that. Some learn the language (and I obviously don’t mean this literally), go to Yale, and become part of the American mainstream. Just like some people who grow up in ultra-oppressive Evangelical environments become professors of mathematics, adopt deeply progressive beliefs, and start using the word “Repubenrons.”
Clarissa's Blog 
“a system that is more flexible, less hierarchical, and explosively progressive socially?”
I don’t see it. From what I can tell, It’s more likely to decimate the middle class and create a stratified Latin American style system of a small elite and a large have not class scrambling after scraps of casual labor and otherwise left to their own.
And human nature is what it is. A society made up of atomized individuals with no identities beyond those that can be put on (or discarded) like a slogan bearing t-shirt does not seem very feasible (or desirable).
LikeLike
I just saw a study saying that mid-level middle-class jobs are getting destroyed and the few that remain are experiencing a sharp drop in salaries. But the highest and lowest middle class jobs are gaining both openings and salary. I’ll link to it later v
LikeLike
I am not certain that the Republicans oppose immigration. They seem more interested in stopping naturalization. Keeping immigrants illegal maintains an underclass ready to work for less and too afraid to complain.
LikeLike
“The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to vote today on the STEM Jobs Act, a Republican-backed bill that would create up to 55,000 new visas for foreign graduates of American universities with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or mathematics. The bill would also eliminate the diversity visa lottery, which allocates spots to immigrants from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States.“
LikeLike
Agree with Cliff. It has been evident for about 35 years that the goal is to move us in the South American way. Of course Brazil is trying to go in the other direction now, but remember it was the world’s most unequal country recently and I am not vulgar-Marxist enough to look forward to things getting worse so that they can allegedly get better.
Also, it is not just “Fordism” that undergirded standards of living in 20th century, and Fordism vs post-Fordism is a false choice and an unrealistically narrow view.
LikeLike
I’m afraid I don’t understand your analysis, Clarissa. I’m a liberal Democrat, but I’m troubled by the stereotyping of Evangelical Christians, even very politically conservative Evangelicals, and I know it’s a mistake to generalize and dismiss them all as ignorant.
I think immigration in the U.S. and most Western countries is all about cheap labor. It’s an economic agenda, not a social or political agenda. From what I know, most Europeans are quite nationalistic and fearful that immigrants from outside Europe will dilute their national identities. I think many Europeans are quite concerned about immigration of Muslims from Africa. They would like to build a high fence along the Mediterranean, just as many Americans want to build a fence a fence at the border with Mexico.
LikeLike
I realize that things could change over the many years I’ve been out of the US but the evangelicals I’ve known were not necessarily ignorant or fearful of mainstream culture and they freely sampled it. But they did have an element of distance to it (that if anything I tended to admire).
And muslims immigration to WEurope is definitely more social/political as economic since they tend to undercontribute economically (second and third generations work at significantly lower rates that first generations for example).
The goal was/is apparently to weaken traditional social cohesion and (moderate) nationalism. The uptick in aggressive nationalism that has resulted was presumably not on their radar but they call them unforeseen consequences for a reason.
LikeLike
I wrote about fear of modernity a while ago: https://clarissasblog.com/2011/01/10/conservative-rage-jared-loughner-and-the-arizona-shooting/
“The goal was/is apparently to weaken traditional social cohesion and (moderate) nationalism.”
– This is exactly what I’m saying. The weakening of traditional social cohesion dilutes opportunities for organized resistance.
LikeLike
“I think immigration in the U.S. and most Western countries is all about cheap labor. It’s an economic agenda, not a social or political agenda. ”
“The people who control the Republican Party love immigration because immigration means cheap labor.”
– I’m not a Marxist. I don’t deny anybody the right to engage in a Marxist analysis, but I always warn that for me it doesn’t do much. The Republicans in Congress are pushing for a bill that will grant permanent residency to immigrants with advanced stem degrees and close down the immigration lottery. This means giving up on the kind of immigration that brings cheap labor in and go for the most expensive labor in the world. So I have to look for reasons other than the straightforward Marxist ones.
LikeLike
You’re assuming they’re serious and that this bill isn’t part of a larger game (IINM the white house is opposed which they probably counted on).
I decided many years ago that the last thing the republican establishment wants is a ‘repeal’ of RvW, the moment that happens their base is up for grabs (or goes apolitical) so that republican presidents make sure to maintain a pro-choice majority in the SC.
I’m vaguely of the opinion that some level of migration by the highly motivated is natural and normal and has always been a part of human societies. But I’m not a fan of mass immigration for immigration’s sake. Mass immigration is usually a signal that something is deeply wrong in the source country and I’m generally more interested in fixing that (or at least trying).
LikeLike
“You’re assuming they’re serious and that this bill isn’t part of a larger game (IINM the white house is opposed which they probably counted on).”
– They are counting on these STEM immigrants to vote Republican. As they probably will. Everybody votes Republican in sciences, especially if they make a lot of money.
LikeLike
You’re right, Republicans and all of corporate America want to lure high-tech geniuses to U.S. Every other advanced country wants them as well.
Republicans in Congress would also like a legal system to bring in cheap seasonal labor as needed, and then return them home when not needed. They want cheap labor, but only on the most favorable possible terms.
Republicans in Congress are unwilling to agree to any immigration reform granting a path to citizenship for the millions of immigrants already in the US. Republicans are simply posturing.
LikeLike