OPINION:Migrants in search of work and shelter often have a historic claim to be given an opportunity, writes BRYAN MUKANDI
RUADHÁN MAC Cormaic’s recent articles on migration have brought back to the surface some concerns I have had for a while now. At the heart of these is the question of justice.
One of Karl Marx’s more provocative statements was: “. . . primitive accumulation plays in Political Economy about the same part as original sin in theology. Adam bit the apple, thereupon sin fell on the human race. Its origin is supposed to be as an anecdote of the past. In times long gone by there were two sorts of people; one the diligent, intelligent, and above all, frugal elite; the other, lazy rascals, spending their substance, and more, in riotous living . . . Thus it came to pass that the former sort accumulated wealth, and the latter sort had nothing to sell except their own skins. And from this original sin dates the poverty of the great majority that, despite all its labour, has up to now nothing to sell but itself, and the wealth of the few that increases constantly although they have long ceased to work . . . In actual history it is notorious that conquest, enslavement, robbery, murder . . . play the great part . . . The methods of primitive accumulation are anything but idyllic”.
Marx’s critique of political economy was that it is ahistorical and therefore blind to the factors that have created the state of affairs today. Wealthy nations are not simply wealthy by virtue of the ingenuity and industry of their population. Likewise, the poor aren’t just poor because of mismanagement of their “uncaring, corrupt leaders” or because they procreate like rabbits. As convenient as these explanations may be, they are simply wrong.
Bearing that in mind, why should people from poorer parts of the world be denied the right to live and seek employment in wealthier parts? Even if they should fail to find a job, why shouldn’t they be allowed to be unemployed in a place where poverty means the humiliation of queuing for the dole and the social exclusion that accompanies that, as opposed to starvation, sickness and eventually, death?
Years ago a group of junior doctors in Zimbabwe sat outside a run-down hospital discussing our country’s economic and political situation and the fact that our four-week salary could only be stretched as far as the first two weeks by the frugal. Having wished plagues on the country’s leadership, we started discussing our escape. Someone had heard doctors were being hired in Iraq, and the pay was fantastic. The only drawback was that Iraq was one of the few places where life expectancy was worse than in Zimbabwe. Most of us decided that poverty was a better way to go than shrapnel.
Namibia, Swaziland, Lesotho and South Africa were discussed. Maybe half of that group now work there. Someone brought up Australia and New Zealand. They were fine but it is difficult to get a job there as a doctor without work experience in a “developed country”. The US involved sitting ridiculously expensive exams – out of the question for someone struggling to feed themselves.
And then there was Britain. While it was once the destination of choice for Zimbabwean doctors (and people from every other professional background), rumour had it that it was becoming increasingly difficult for foreigner doctors to get work there. Most of us shrugged our shoulders and laughed about the fact that we weren’t really wanted anywhere. Dr Maphosa on the other hand, a typically subdued kind of person, flew into a rage. He was livid that the country that had colonised ours refused to let him work there. As far as he was concerned, the least Britain could do was to give him the opportunity to earn a living there since so many of its subjects had done well off his.
I didn’t like that argument when I first heard it. I liked the romantic notion of pulling oneself up by the bootstraps. I read management books that spoke of a sense of entitlement as the unforgivable sin. I believed that we had to move on from the past and through self-reliance, grit and determination, overcome whatever obstacles we might face.
Living in Ireland has been an effective tonic for those views. Ireland did not acquire colonies in Africa, or anywhere else for that matter. She was even colonised herself. And while this country has got a lot of things right, a good deal of her prosperity is the result of the luck of geography. Had she been situated on the east coast of Africa or the southern tip of South America, things would be different. Meeting little old ladies in Ireland that are no different from my grandmother, I can’t help but question the gulf between the quality of life they have compared to hers.
Ruadhán Mac Cormaic showed that changing attitudes towards migration extend far beyond Ireland. And those changes are understandable. We all have a survival instinct. All of us, by nature, want to ensure that our future, and that of our loved ones, at the very least remains static. But what about justice? To ensure that people from poorer nations cannot work or find shelter in wealthier ones; to hold to the claim that the poverty in those places is in no way related to the wealth here . . . I can only imagine what Maphosa would say.