>>81830623i don't really see any panic, economic cycles involving migration policy is pretty well established throughout history.
boomers were talking about overpopulation just 20 years ago, and 2 centuries ago malthusian retards were taken seriously as well. that's not the controversy, the controversy is whether people are getting dumber or less civilized, and whether that is done according to some grand plan by rich people or just as a consequence of abundance and technology.
the language of "for the people" has been a tool for leftist political parties to subjugate a lot of the eastern world recently. there are pros and cons at a local, community, tribal level for people to be "socialist" and take care of each other while they can literally see and take care of each other directly. the problem with a national or global vision of this concept, especially one that involves a central planning authority and reeducation camps and shit like that, is that you become disconnected from the actual socialism part, but you still offer and often end up losing your freedoms. it's just the people in power who decide who you're going to take care of and how, and at least in the case of the soviet union and china before they switched economic systems, central planning physically can't keep up with changes in the needs and capabilities of a large population.