ITALIAN PHILOSOPHER DIEGO FUSARO: “CAPITALISM WILL MAKE MIGRANTS OUT OF ALL CITIZENS”


By Daniele Pozzati


[This interview published on 2/6/2019 is translated abridged from the German on the Internet,  https://deutsch.rt.com.]


[The UN cannot solve problems with its concepts on migration, Diego Fusaro explained to RT. According to the Italian philosopher, national sovereignty is the last bastion of democracies that must be defended.]


[RT spoke with the Italian philosopher Diego Fusaro. Dr. Fusaro teaches philosophy of history at the IASSP in Mailand (“Institute for Strategic and Political Studies”). He describes himself as an “independent model student of Hegel and Marx” and “against turbo capitalism beyond right and left.” Fusano is very popular in Italy thanks to his frequent appearances on Italian TV.]


According to UN General Secretary Antonio Guterres, migration allows “millions of people to seek new possibilities that could benefit both the original communities and the host communities.”


I go in the opposite direction than Antonio Guterres and the choir of politically correct thinking. This choir insists Africans want to come to Europe because Africa is more backward than Europe and that Europe is the Eldorado of hope and so forth. This is the racist narrative of one-sided thinking. In reality, we are in the third phase of colonialism. The first was the era of three-way trade where Europeans brought Africans to America, sold and exploited them there and returned to Europe with the spoils. Then came the time of imperialist colonialism described and fought by Lenin in which Europeans directly robbed and exploited Africans in Africa and brought the money to Europe.


Now we are in a new third phase of colonialism. : the phase of globalized colonialism in which African countries become destabilized. The NATO war against Libya is an example. In this way, the flight of Africans is ruthlessly exploited by capitalism to lower the costs of the native work migrants and to generalize the profile of the migrant – in other words, to make all of us into migrants. Capitalism does not want to integrate migrants. It wants to make migrants out of all citizens. The profile of the precarious migrant is stateless, without roots, and in constant movement since he is handed over to the free traffic of goods and persons. This is the mass migration today…
In 2013, former Pope Ratzinger said: “Only the right to migration is emphasized today. No one speaks about the right to be deeply rooted in one’s country or not to be uprooted by the processes of global capitalism. This seems to me to be the fundamental point.


Africans have every right to remain in their own country and not to be uprooted by bomb attacks and colonialism – as in the French colonialism that is still visible in African countries. Every people including the peoples of Africa have the full right to exist in their autonomy without being uprooted by the history of capitalism.


Why does the UN see migration as a kind of panacea or cure-all for the problems of under-development…Are there really no other solutions?


In reality, this is only a façade that ideologically hides the substance. The substance is the one exploitation process of labor power that uses the lever of the industrial reserve army described by Marx. This means deporting masses of ideal slaves like Africans. Africans are ideal slaves because they are deported from their country and thrown into a country where they do not know the language, have no territorial roots and cannot defend themselves. Therefore, capital loves mass immigration.


In all Europe, voters and politicians seem to distinguish pro-immigrants on the left and anti-immigrants on the right. Often there is an extreme polarization: one is either for an uncontrolled immigration or completely against immigration, even if it is well-regulated.


There are confrontations between one-sided positions. On one side, the political left sees something positive and marvelous in immigration. On the other side, the political right regards migrants as enemies. These positions are both wrong. The left has not understood that mass immigration is a weapon in the hands of the dominant cosmopolitan class – and a weapon against the working class of all Europe. Rightist parties do not understand that the enemies are not migrants but those who deport them.


The enemy is not the starving person but the one who starves the peoples. The enemy is not the one who runs away but the one who forces people to flee. Immigration is a weapon in the hands of capitalists…


The voters of traditional leftist parties seem disappointed with the exception of Great Britain where Jeremy Corbyn’s Labor Party is popular again. Sometimes, it seems leftist parties are more interested in the fates of immigrants than in ordinary citizens – and their problems, finding a job, building houses, raising children and so forth.

Yes, the separation more and more manifest among the working classes and the left is obvious for everyone. This is the fruit of the Kafkaesque metamorphosis of leftist-parties that increasingly become parties of capitalist modernization of morals out of parties fighting against capital, in the battle for labor and the struggle for the oppressed classes. The catchwords are gender mainstreaming, homosexual marriage and so forth.


These are the claims of the ruling class on the social and cultural plane. Leftist parties have constantly defended these claims as social progress.


The progress of capital is against everything that can limit it: sense of community, traditional values, union successes, wages and so forth. Therefore, all the battles of the left today are the same battles as those of capital seen from the perspective of culture and morals.


Leftist parties defend all the eccentricities and stand in harmony with the profile of the capitalist individual. They defend migrants be cause it is capital itself that wants to reduce all of us to the rank of migrants… No longer do they wage the heroic struggle of the factory proletariat. AfD (anti-immigrant Alternative for Germany) is allegedly a party that defends the people against the elites. That is populist. The neo-language of the markets slanders every position that looks populist – every position that defends the dominated and not the dominators. That is the paradox…


In reality, the elite are demophobic. That means it hates people and democracy. It is an elite that increasingly wants to decide autocratically without regard to the traditional population. Maintaining democracy or possibly reducing its space is discussed more and more. “Only the competent should vote,” it is said. This is repeated by the financial elites. We must be populist and not elitist today, democratic and not demophobic and defend national sovereignty and not globalization.


National sovereignty is the last shrine of democracy. There is no democracy outside the national sovereign state. As in ancient Greece, there was no democracy outside the critical polis. There are no realities that are post-national and simultaneously democratic. Taking away sovereignty always means taking away democracy. Therefore, we must be democratic populists and for sovereignty. There is no possibility of separating these dimensions.