Başak Kocadost
As we approach the election period, we witness attacks on the Kurdish movement, the incitement of hostility against LGBTI+ people, and the stoking of anti-immigrant sentiments. All establishment parties discuss how they will deport immigrants, with some even claiming they are raising funds to do so. In countries that have recently held elections, such as Hungary, Sweden, and Italy, far-right parties have risen to power with similar racist, anti-immigrant, and anti-LGBTI+ rhetoric. Similarly, those who lost recent elections, like Trump or Bolsonaro, have left a rather grim legacy by ingraining their ideologies within their societies. Indeed, what is more critical than the existence of these politicians is the presence of masses who look to them for hope and see their own well-being in these policies. The position from which today’s right-wing advances is the so-called criticism of capitalism’s multiple crises, framed through racist and sexist lenses. As long as the left fails to build a strong anti-capitalist opposition, right-wing parties will continue to gain ground more easily.
In France, during his election campaign, Communist Party leader Roussel repeatedly reminds voters that asylum seekers whose requests have been denied should be sent back to their countries, while promising increased security and a stronger police presence. In Brazil, as "leftist" Lula aligns with the center-right ahead of the elections, he states that not only he but also all the women he is married to are against abortion. Meanwhile, some who consider themselves leftists argue that Lula had to make these statements to win the elections, and this view is even considered a "realistic" analysis. However, this situation shows that the right has already won the election before it even takes place.
In Turkey, while the right wing openly and militantly propagates its views without hesitation, the left, including socialist and revolutionary organizations, remains timider in addressing immigration issues. Right-wing parties speak out on this matter recklessly, while only faint counter-voices emerge from the left. Given the repressive regime we live under and the many areas requiring our struggle, there are understandable reasons for this situation. Nevertheless, I believe it is important for us to reflect on it. The government and the right wing in general come at us with discourses like homeland, nation, morality, and family—concepts they assume we cannot fundamentally oppose. However, as we remain hesitant in our objections, the right wing gains more ground, while we lose ours. Even those defending migrant rights on humanitarian grounds are told, "Take them in and feed them in your own house." Responses to "We will send them all back" often include, "We will send back this many," "We will send them off with a drum and zurna," "We will send them back with their consent," or "We will create the conditions for their return." Our horizon is narrowing, and we are being drawn further to the right.
In this piece, I will address questions such as how we should approach the increasing racism towards migrants, why we should oppose threats of deportation, and how we can fight against racism. To begin, I will discuss what racism is and why these attacks on migrants should be considered as racism.
IS THE ISSUE XENOPHOBIA?
Have you ever heard a German living in Istanbul being referred to as a migrant? Or, when introduced to a Canadian English teacher, do you feel you’ve met a migrant or simply a Canadian? Similarly, I don’t think anyone would perceive a Dutch young person without a job as a migrant; they are more likely just called a “foreigner.” Therefore, it is important to recognize that the issue is not merely about migration in terms of residing outside one's country of birth, but about racism. The term "migrant" is not generally applied to foreigners living in Turkey; rather, it is used for foreigners and their children who are considered inferior to Turks. This observation holds true in other countries as well. Thus, racism cannot be reduced to xenophobia or anti-foreigner sentiments. For instance, this framework cannot explain racism against Black people in the US. Approaches that individualize or psychologize the issue fail to capture the systemic nature of racism. Racism cannot be reduced to nationalist attitudes and rhetoric, just as patriarchy cannot be reduced to sexist language and behavior. Racism should also not be viewed merely as an extreme form of nationalism. It is, in fact, the term used to describe the power relationship that distinguishes between the nationalism of the oppressing nation and the nationalism of the oppressed nation.
Capitalism, of course, seems to offer "solutions" to this issue through international institutions and NGOs. There’s nothing surprising about that. However, this does not reduce the issue of migration to just an NGO matter. Like all other oppressed groups, we do not defend migrants for "identity politics," which is often framed wrongly and dismissed, or for the sake of cosmopolitanism, or out of pure humanitarianism. As the left, we need to oppose both the depoliticization of this issue through NGOs and its exploitation by the right.
Migrant workers are employed without insurance, with low wages, and under very poor conditions, and there is much work to be done in this area. And yes, migrants are not the ones “taking our jobs.” In countries where women have increasingly entered the paid job market, similar rhetoric was used against women in the past. In Turkey, however, “fortunately,” the female employment rate is very low, and women are already scarce in male-dominated sectors, so this rhetoric is not applied. Otherwise, we women would be in trouble! Just as capitalism benefits from patriarchy, it also exploits racism, integrating it in different ways at different times. But just as patriarchy cannot be reduced to a purely class issue, migration is not merely a class issue either.
RACISM AS A SYSTEM
Racism is a foundational system—an exploitative and hierarchical structure that has shaped advanced capitalist countries as we know them. Like any system that perpetuates inequality, racism has an ideological framework that legitimizes its existence. It uses real (or purported) physical and cultural differences between peoples as justification for the inequalities it enforces. Physical attributes such as skin color, eye shape, and hair density, as well as social and cultural traits like mannerisms, eating habits, and beliefs, are employed to normalize and naturalize inequality. Historically, this is why slavery and pseudoscientific racism developed concurrently; they are inseparable.
In other words, the
capitalism we live under has been historically built on racial inequalities,
just as it has on patriarchy. These inequalities persist today. The conditions
of Black people in the Americas and migrants from former colonial or third-world
countries in Europe are prime examples. People from these groups are often
relegated to the worst jobs, form the poorest segments of the working class,
are most exposed to state and police violence, and face the highest rates of
death—not because capitalists have found no other way to lower wages, but
because (neo)colonial capitalism has managed to renew its racist repertoire and
impose it on the white, “native” working class, justifying it through the
perspective of this same working class.
However, in Turkey, although the "Kurdish issue" has been intensely discussed and continues to be, there is little mention of racism as a systemic problem. Ultimately, it is the affected subjects who shape the politics, including its language, against inequality. The Kurdish movement has been doing this for years. Yet, it seems that perhaps because the Kurds address their struggles under the banner of "Kurdish" issues, racism is perceived as a non-issue in Turkey. Today, the left still falls short in correctly framing the issue of migration and establishing a strong anti-racist stance.
HOW SHOULD WE APPROACH THE ISSUE?
The main shortcoming here is that migrants, who live under the constant threat of deportation and expulsion, are unable to express themselves or raise their voices. They cannot exercise even the most basic rights of organization. While it is true that "migration is not the cause but a result of capitalism or imperialism," this understanding should not lead us to view migrants solely as victims oppressed by the misguided policies of great powers. We must work to create spaces and opportunities where migrants can speak for themselves and organize. This struggle involves not only opposing the migration policies of countries widely considered imperialist but also challenging the policies of our own state, which are part of imperialist relationships.
In other words, the fight against racism entails a comprehensive struggle targeting all its underlying foundations. While we might not be able to wage such a struggle immediately, we could at least approach the issue of migration in this manner. Let’s use the defense of migrant rights as a means and opportunity to advocate for and imagine universal rights for everyone. For instance, we might push for the right to free transportation for all, challenging the Istanbul Municipality’s practice of personalizing transportation cards, which prevents many migrants from using public transport. The situation of unregistered Afghan refugees, for instance, could prompt us to question our understanding of registration, borders, and their legitimacy. We might also address the increasing surveillance and control by states in this regard. Rather than focusing on inter-state negotiations, let’s consider solutions that involve the people themselves.
Opposing the deportation of migrants means standing against governments' arbitrary decisions that deeply affect people's lives and is thus connected to our capacity to resist such top-down designs. We should approach the issue this way. Let’s strive to turn the sovereigns' attacks on migrants into a countermove to defend all the oppressed.
Each migrant who has fled the tyranny of their own state and left their country is, in fact, a proposition that can broaden our vision toward imagining a new life. The struggle against racism inspires us to envision a new society not confined by singular national identities; it offers an opportunity to build a shared existence—if we choose to view it this way. Borrowing from the LGBT+ movement’s succinct slogan, “the liberation of migrants will also liberate those who are not migrants,” let us consider the issue from this perspective as well.
* This article was first published in Turkish on GazeteDuvar on January 16, 2023, as part of a series by the 'We Want to Live Together Initiative.' https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/gocmenlerin-kurtulusu-gocmen-olmayanlari-da-ozgurlestirecek-haber-1598468
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder