I'm inclined to think you're technically right, but I'm less sure about how practically right you are. E.g., "if everyone would just be chill and not attack each other, there would be much less conflct." True, but not really helpful. Specifically:
if Syria had free markets, the result of the mass exodus would be much higher wages. High wages would attract people back, naturally.
Logic seems reasonable. But there's a lot buried under the surface of "if Syria had free markets." Like, free markets are a result of good governance, at some level; and political freedom; which itself is bound up with lots of other things, and feeds back on itself in complex loops.
Put another way: the minimal viable practical solution to getting Syria the free markets you're describing might still be a giant lift. Which doesn't make you wrong, but I think it changes the tactical prescription of how that (or similar things) might be helped along.
All of that is totally fair. I'm just pointing out that there's something going on other than an organic need for third world labor.
An analogy in my mind would be whether someone with a preventable and reversible illness needs medication to survive. If they don't fix their illness, then yes, but they also don't need to be sick.
reply
If they don't fix their illness, then yes, but they also don't need to be sick.
It's a good analogy. Good esp to make salient the difference btwn things that are impossible due to physical laws of the universe, vs things for which there is an obvious solution that cannot be practically reached. Making this explicit on occasion changes the environment.
reply
Organic need for third world labor?
Psyop
reply