PHOENIX CLASS WAR COUNCIL is a fanatical, communist anarchist group pressing the attack against all systems of hierarchy and oppression. Among the hierachies they claim to fight are "capitalism" and "the state". They consider themselves libertarian and libertine. However, any group dedicated to attacking capitalism should be suspect and considered, at best, communistic. Open immigration to communists means more bodies to exploit for the benefit of others. Great idea to sanction these guys by giving them publicity, Tom.

@  Mike Renzulli:

You've kind of butchered our statement there, taking some of it and adding words of your own choosing.  First it should be pointed out that we do not identify as communists.  And there is no such thing as a "communist anarchist".  There are "anarcho-communists" and "anarchist-communists", though you really don't hear that used much these days. Either way, in both cases they are anti-state and anti-capitalist and should in no way be conflated with state communists or, in my opinion, with communists of any sort. 

Funny thing is at Saturday's rally I got in a quite heated confrontation with a communist. Likewise, PCWC confronted communists at the rally early last year.  We are no friends of communists.  At the anarchist bookfair in San Francisco last year, anarchists drove the Revolutionary Communist Party out of the fair grounds.  So, you shouldn't lump anarchists and communists together.  We know our history.  Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin killed plenty of anarchists and I am sure that they themselves would chuckle and reject your conflation of the two.

Thirdly, as we don't want a state to manage workers, and we don't want capitalists to exploit them, I fail to see the logic in your insinuation that we want "more bodies to exploit for the benefit of others".  Of course we want no such thing and I challenge you to find anything we have said or done that expresses anything but a complete, unending and uncompromising desire for absolute freedom of everyone from exploitation and domination.

The fact is, if you've lived here long enough, you know that the border has essentially always been open.  Free movement across it has been the rule and not the exception in this region.  In that sense, focusing on the border is to fall for a red herring.  The open border isn't the cause of exploitation.  Capitalism and the state are the causes of exploitation.

Further, setting aside the short-sightedness of the overall effects of more border policing, asking for increased militarization of the border in particular screws over, for one, the O'odham whose lands in the south of the state cross the border and extend for quite some way into Mexico.  When you militarize the border, you impede their traditional right to cross and that's hardly fair, given that they were here long before anyone else was. 

And of course it follows from there.  Next thing you know the government is setting up databases to determine who can and cannot work.  It's checking ID's at checkpoints.  It's synching up state, local and federal police and bureaucratic databases.  All because you want to close a border that has traditionally been open.

This is why I suggest to you that if you want to end exploitation, then you are far better turning away from calling for the state to attack migrant workers and their families (a contradictory position in my eyes if what you want to do is protect people from exploitation), and focusing on building solidarity with people across borders.  It's only through solidarity that we can end exploitation.