May Day 2000: Labor aristocracy and bourgeoisie court immigrant 
workers

by MC44 & MC12

What do Federal Reserve Chairpersyn Alan Greenspan and the AFL-CIO 
have in common lately? Both see immigrant labor as the solution to 
their problems. With low unemployment and so-called "labor 
shortages" in the U.$., the Fed thinks the United Snakes should 
relax its immigration policies and raise quotas at the border.(1) 
And the big unions, weak and looking for new members, are 
retooling their historic anti-immigrant platform to 
opportunistically welcome oppressed nation workers into their 
ranks. Far from a radical turn in the political tide, Amerikan 
unions are doing what they've always done -- promoting their own 
economic interests (the inflated and imperialist-subsidized 
Amerikan wage) at the expense of the international proletariat. In 
this new century, that happens to include temporarily embracing 
immigrant workers. MIM takes the opportunity of International 
Workers Day 2000 to review this development from the perspective 
of the world's oppressed majority -- the international 
proletariat.

First and foremost, true revolutionaries are internationalists and 
believe in open borders. There are no "Amerikan" jobs. And 
supporting high wages in this country means supporting a system of 
global inequality and militarism.

'If we can't beat 'em, let 'em join us'

At its executive council meeting in February, the AFL-CIO passed a 
resolution calling for amnesty for the approximately 5-6 million 
undocumented workers currently in the U$. The union has also 
reversed its position on sanctioning employers for hiring 
"illegal" workers -- a policy that the unions helped to pass in 
1986 and have supported ever since. So, having failed to keep 
immigrants out of the U$ in the first place (the original intent 
of the sanctions), the unions now recognize that immigrants are a 
substantial part of the U$ workforce. The AFL-CIO views immigrants 
as a threat to their own high wages -- as they always have -- but 
this time their concern is that employers can and do use the 
immigration authorities as a tool to keep immigrants from joining 
unions, keeping wages lower than organized labor can command in a 
given industry.

The unions are joined by the state (Greenspan) and by 
internationalist-capitalists. In response to the AFL-CIO 
resolution, the executive vice president of the U.$. Chamber of 
Congress said, "'It's a welcome embrace of amnesty from an 
employer's perspective, since we do have a shortage of workers in 
this country and will continue to have a shortage of workers for 
several decades.'"(2) The liberal advocacy group National 
Immigration Forum put it this way: '"You have the makings of a 
business-labor compact that could draw new immigration policies 
for the next decade.'"(3)

Neither Amerikan business nor labor has been the historical friend 
of immigrant and oppressed nation workers, and the prospect of 
their continued influence on immigration policy is repulsive to 
revolutionaries. From violence against Chinese laborers in the 
nineteenth century, to their open support of "Operation Wetback" 
in the mid-1950s -- which expelled "more than 1 million 
undocumented immigrants to Mexico"(1), to the murder of Vincent 
Chin by Detroit autoworkers in the early 1980s to the viciously 
nationalist rhetoric opposing NAFTA, Amerikan workers consistently 
line up against the oppressed. The recent turn in policy by the 
AFL-CIO does not change this fundamental reality. It merely 
reflects a change in tactics from total exclusion to opportunist 
inclusiveness.

Where the buck stops

But while the unions are calling for amnesty for undocumented 
workers currently in the U$, they've made it clear they still want 
to control the flow of immigration according to the interests of 
Amerikan workers. Hence the resolution calls for "the creation of 
job training programs for new immigrants" at the same time as it 
opposes "any expansion of the current guest worker program"(4) and 
supports "tougher sanctions against any company that uses 
advertisements or recruiters in other countries to encourage 
illegal immigrants to come to the United States to work for 
them."(3)

Job training and an end to guest worker programs are both tied to 
the unions' opposition to new or increased immigration, 
underscoring the fact that their current courtship is a concession 
to the reality of today's workforce. According to the Washington 
Post, "estimates indicate as many as 20 percent of the entrants to 
the work force last year were immigrants, in occupations as 
diverse as meatpacking, construction and computer science."(2)

And the unions have seen the greatest increases in their own 
numbers among immigrants. Last year, "union membership increased 
... by 266,000 to 16.4 million, the largest one-year increase in 
two decades and a reversal of a five-year decline in private 
sector membership. ... Of the new recruits, nearly 55,000 were 
Latinos, whose total membership has grown to 1.5 million 
nationwide, the largest number ever."(5) The union hopes its call 
for amnesty will increase these numbers even more.

In March, the United Nations echoed Greenspan's concern about 
labor shortages across many imperialist countries. The UN released 
a report warning that "if current trends continue, Japan and most 
of Europe will undergo a dramatic decline in population during the 
next 50 years, increasing the ranks of the elderly and causing 
labor shortages that will threaten economic growth." Their 
recommendation? Let in more immigrants.(6) The report noted that 
the United Snakes has kept up its population with increased 
immigration. Sweden, on the other hand, "has offered financial 
incentives to encourage parents to have more children."(6) 

Selling out the oppressed in the end

MIM argues that only undocumented workers and prisoners in the 
U.$. are truly exploited, using their labor to produce more than 
the value of what they are paid. The workers making minimum wage 
or more are paid more than the value of their labor, with 
paychecks subsidized by the exploitation of the international 
proletariat.

The great inequality between nations creates huge immigration 
flows from oppressed to oppressor nations. Immigrants who gain 
citizenship or legal status can eventually cross over and join the 
ranks of the labor aristocracy. According to the UN, "a Mexican 
worker would make roughly $31 a week at home, compared to $278 a 
week in the United States" -- a nine-fold increase.(7) That $278 
per week puts Mexican workers near the bottom of the U.$. 
workforce ($7 or so per hour), but puts them ahead of the 
international proletariat. In Malaysia workers earn $2 per day, 
while in Indonesia laborers earn $0.28 per day.(8)

The persecution and exploitation of undocumented workers prevents 
immigrants from entering the labor aristocracy -- an amnesty or 
legalization of current immigrants would enable it. Along with 
restrictions on new immigration, this would represent a victory 
for Amerikan organized labor, protecting their position while 
reinforcing the economic barrier between the oppressor nation and 
the international proletariat. The gains made for these few 
immigrant workers pale beside the suffering of the hundreds of 
millions left behind.

Immigration policy under the imperialist state is a powerful 
weapon of social control and manipulation. The big unions and the 
big capitalists both see benefits from changing immigration 
policy, and that could lead to changes in the law.

The Amerikan working class thinks legal immigrants will help 
bolster their own position today, and revolutionaries know the 
labor aristocracy is driven by its own self interest. With that 
understanding, we know their "welcoming" attitude toward 
immigrants already here is a complement to their nationalist 
attack on the international proletariat in NAFTA-type agreements. 
Both are about protecting Amerikan jobs and Amerikan wages.

This International Workers Day, MIM reminds revolutionaries and 
potential revolutionaries that imperialism's borders are the 
prison walls of the international proletariat. In the imperialist 
countries, anyone who's not demanding open borders is not on the 
side of the international proletariat.

Notes:

1. Los Angeles Times 25 February 2000.
2. Washington Post 17 February 2000.
3. New York Times 17 February 2000.
4. Los Angeles Times 17 February 2000.
5. The Boston Globe 10 March 2000.
6. Seattle Times 22 March 2000.
7. International Labour Organization statistic in Associated 
Press, March 2, 2000.
8. International Labour Organization statistic in Agence France 
Press, March 2, 2000.