that family who runs the local foreign cuisine restaurant you enjoy, they struggled a lot getting a visa to stay in your country. they had to wait for years, learn an entirely different language to be taken even a little serious, even then their accents were mocked. could you do it? move to an entirely different place with no proper money on you, learn an entirely different language and wait 10 years to be considered a citizen, a person? have your accent and personhood mocked as you do? you'd have to do it, if you woke up one day and your purchase power had fell by %400, only to fall further, if you woke up and your street, your home was bombed to pieces. that family wanted a better life for their kids, and they regularly have to see news of little kids like their own getting murdered by people of your country. do you think that's what they prefer? do you not think they maybe would've preferred to live in their homeland where thats not a worry, where they won't struggle with language, where all their family and friends were, where their children should've been safe, where they'd be considered human? but they had no choice, because your country and their allies ruined their country to pieces, bombed it, assaulted it, raped it. and here they are now, their "better" chance at a safer life being serving in the country of their assaulters and offering you a piece of the home they had to leave. they consier themselves among the lucky ones who weren't killed trying to come here, who could at least get a visa to be considered semi human. you should be kind to them, but don't think your kindness makes up for the tragedy
I agree that migration shouldn't be made harder. It should be much easier and safer. But that sentiment, while decent, doesn't go deep enough. The real goal shouldn't just be making the journey safer; it should be making people's home countries safe so they never have to flee at all.
The fact that the United States is a place people flee *to*, and the fact that people are forced to flee *from* their homes, are not separate problems. They are cause and effect. The second happens largely because of the first.
Let me give a simplified but structurally accurate example, and I'll walk through exactly why the misery is profitable. Picture a giant U.S.-based fruit company operating in an imperialized Latin American country. With the backing of the U.S. government, it helps overthrow popular leaders, supports the torture and murder of activists, and installs a brutal comprador regime, a local ruling class that serves foreign interests in exchange for a cut of the spoils. In return, that regime rewrites the laws so the company can operate with near-zero costs for labor and safety.
Why is this so profitable? Otherwise, a company has to pay decent wages, provide insurance, maintain safe facilities, and properly handle toxic chemicals. Those are all costs. Under the puppet regime, the company can legally pay workers a few cents an hour, far below survival level. It can skip insurance entirely. It doesn't need to spend on safety equipment because if a worker is injured or killed, the company has no legal liability. It can spray pesticides from the air straight onto workers and nearby communities, causing cancer and birth defects, and face zero consequences. Instead of paying to manage toxic waste, it simply dumps it. Every one of these horrors is, in cold accounting terms, a cost eliminated.
The result is fruit produced at a tiny fraction of its real cost. The company ships that fruit back to the imperial country and sells it cheap in supermarkets. Because the price is low, it captures huge market share. The gap between the crushed production costs and the selling price, even a low one, is enormous. That gap is superprofit, profit so large it would be impossible without extreme exploitation backed by state violence.
The chain is simple: imperial state violence installs a puppet regime, that regime eliminates worker protections, labor and safety costs plummet, production becomes dirt cheap, goods sell cheaply in the imperial core and seize markets, and the profit margin swells far beyond normal returns.
Crucially, those cheap goods don't only benefit the company. They flow into the imperial country's economy, keeping prices low for consumers. Ordinary working people in the U.S. can fill their shopping carts with affordable fruit, coffee, clothing, and electronics. That material benefit, cheap goods bought with foreign blood, helps build consent for the entire arrangement. Some working people in the imperial core can feel a small stake in the system because their cost of living is subsidized by misery in the imperialized world. This actively undermines solidarity between working people across borders, because the system makes it seem like their interests are opposed.
Now back to the imperialized country. Because a repressive government has been installed, groups that were already vulnerable face even sharper abuse. Then, in a truly vicious twist, this doesn't just make those people more vulnerable to both local and foreign exploitation, but also creates instability and social breakdown that the company and its regime create are later held up as reasons for more imperial intervention. "Look at the savages, we have to step in." The very wounds inflicted by foreign corporate power are used to justify further domination.
This isn't just about fruit. It's the pattern for whole economies. So what happens next? Some people reach a breaking point and try to flee toward the imperial centers that helped destroy their homes. Many die trying. Their desperation isn't random. The imperial country is a wealthier place to live *because* the imperialized country has been made poorer. The high standard of living in the imperial core and the destitution of the imperialized periphery are produced by the same machine.
When migrants do arrive, if they survive, they are slotted straight back into exploitation. They become a vulnerable, easily threatened workforce, undocumented, unable to demand fair pay or safe conditions, always deportable. The restaurant owner who clawed his way to stability is one of the lucky ones. Many are funneled into dangerous industries, trafficked, sexually assaulted, or worked in conditions no citizen would tolerate. This is not a glitch; it is a design feature. The imperial economy needs a layer of desperate, exploitable labor. The migrant escapes exploitation in an imperialized country only to be fed into a new form of it in the imperial country, which they endure because, compared to the engineered desperation back home, it is still the lesser evil for many- though kidnappings are also common.
This is why simply demanding "make immigration safer" runs into a structural wall. The current imperialist order needs migrants to be a vulnerable category. Even if some reforms soften the edges for a few, the migrant's function as cheap, precarious labor remains locked in. And the fundamental question still towers over everything: Why did they have to uproot their lives and risk death in the first place? Even if the destination were made more humane, is it acceptable that entire regions are deliberately kept miserable so their people have no choice but to leave? What about the millions who cannot flee, left to live in the wreckage?
The real answer isn't to manage the pain more kindly or to tinker with immigration rules. It is to remove the need to flee altogether. But here we must be absolutely clear. This system is not a malfunction of an otherwise decent capitalism. The superprofits that flow to the imperial core depend directly on the immiseration of the imperialized world. The entire machinery of imperialism, the puppet regimes, the labor aristocracies, the reserve armies of migrant labor, exists because capital accumulation across borders requires it. You cannot reform this away with nicer trade deals, better labor standards, or friendlier immigration policies. Capital will always break or co-opt those reforms because its core drive for superprofit demands a hierarchy of nations. It is also part of a reason why we are currently seeing more immigrants drowned in Europe, more put into camps and treated even worse globally including in the US
The only way to stop the machine is to smash it. The wealth and technology already exist to provide a decent life for everyone on the planet. The obstacle is not scarcity; it is an economic order that concentrates profit in a handful of imperial centers by bleeding the imperialized world dry. That order cannot be patched up; it must be overthrown. The only solution is socialism: an economy organized around human need and planetary solidarity, not private profit, where no nation is deliberately kept impoverished to subsidize cheap goods for another, and where no one is forced to abandon their home because the global gap between exploiter and exploited has been abolished. That requires a revolutionary break with capitalism and imperialism. There is no other road.
