Carguacountii

joined 8 months ago
[–] Carguacountii@hexbear.net 1 points 8 months ago

yes well it explains the recent ceasefire offer of 2 months, and Hamas saying 'sure if the ICJ says ceasefire and you'll abide by one'

[–] Carguacountii@hexbear.net 1 points 8 months ago

Hmm lots of wriggle room for Israel in those orders...

[–] Carguacountii@hexbear.net 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (5 children)

Thanks!

So I take it you're saying that those states who want to make it harder are interested in illegal status migrants?

I hear a lot that the Dems or Biden admin (and therefore, presumably, the various capitalist interest groups they represent) haven't actually changed anything about the border issue - is this true? If it is, it seems like the Dem capitalists also want illegal status migrants for their own industries/sectors, so therefore what is the fight about?

And for example, California (which I think has a big agricultural sector) hasn't joined the new Confederacy, is that because its going with the party line, or is it that its a richer state so can afford to subsidise that sector more and still compete, i.e. not be reliant on undocumented or illegal status migration?

I understand the process of exploitation you describe, it happens where I live too, but I was wondering more about the sectors, factions etc involved and what they're trying to achieve, if you see what I mean?

edit: to clarify, would it be accurate to say (from what I've inferred from your reply) that the poorer states that are concerned more with labor intensive industry are joining this coalition, and that the purpose is to make it harder to attain 'legal status'? Or is it more complicated than that (obviously there are labor intensive industries in big cities and other state too)? What is the unions position on migration, or are they not involved? You mentioned the agricultural sector, what's the positioning of other ones like construction and hospitality, if you happen to know?

[–] Carguacountii@hexbear.net 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

My bet is it'll pass. US, Germany, and possibly (less likely) UK & Australia (less likely than UK still) will vote no, the rest yes.

I think the wording of some of the requests by SA will be altered slightly, and some might not be mandated, but most will.

Although it's supposed to be without predujuce to the merits of the case, these preliminary judgements de facto are an indication of the merits, lawyers always fight a preliminary ruling even though its supposed to make no difference to the final one because actually it obviously does.

I hope I'm right, but I'm prepared to be mocked as a fool if I'm wrong.

In terms of what happens next, Israel will ignore it in practice but also do a propaganda blitz pretending to abide by it, the US will continue to pretend its 'influencing' or 'pressuring' Israel to play nice. But it'll open up other legal and diplomatic attacks, and also raise SA's standing and create a good precedent for others, so its good.

edit; obviously ignoring the two ad hoc judges, who will vote yes and no respectively.

view more: ‹ prev next ›