Data

Tools

Indexes

Applications

Experiments

Awesome

An open API service indexing awesome lists of open source software.

https://github.com/anupamkhosla/philosophy-immigration

Arguments, debate points and discussion on morality of Immigration
https://github.com/anupamkhosla/philosophy-immigration

Last synced: 3 months ago
JSON representation

Arguments, debate points and discussion on morality of Immigration

Awesome Lists containing this project

README 

        
# philosophy-immigration



### Arguments, debate points and discussion on morality of Immigration



Various points such as the following are used in right wing idelogy for immigration laws which lead to discrimination or unjust treatment of immigrants:  



1. We built this country for our people.

2. Our goverment made a deal with the migrant. The migrant willingly accepted the terms of the deal while immigrating to our country.

3. We owe to our country.

4. People of our country come first.



   All of these points fail the test of "All men are equal". This is one of the fundamental concepts of Morality which is agreed by most of the major religions such as Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and Bhudism etc.



   Another important consideration is practicallity. The modern world constitues of countries and it is practically not possible to make every man(person) equal, so there has to be sacrifices made in morality. But, the problem is that this argument is used as a cover for making discriminatory and immoral laws, E.g. child slavery by Apple in China is a perfect example. The practicalitarian's argument is that if they don't provide those children jobs then they would die of starvation anyway, so we are doing a net positive moral deed. In reality, what is being done is ***exploitation*** and ***discrimination***. Why are the people of their own coutry given same child labour laws and wages. Why not let them die too or suffer the same living conditions and laws. For true morality those children in China and children of the provide rconutry should treated as equal. In this book, I will explain in detail how various laws and policies used by countires for immigrants are actually a form of exploitation and unjust.



### Practicality argument:  



**Claim:** Student visa is practically net positive morality. It is a win win for both the Australian government and the migrant studens as Australia gets the money and students get better life.  



**Counter argument:** Then why isn't child slavery in China by Apple not a practical net positive morality? Isn't it a win win for both the poor childeren and Apple Inc in America? How about making same arrangements for extreme poor countries in Africa and India. Would it be a practically net positivie morality to have all products manufactured by child labour in those countries? 



The position seems to be that there is a spectrum of morality. Student visa businees is not that bad of human rights problem. But, where do we draw the line? How about selling covid medicine for 25% extra price to needy countries. How much profit is moraliy ok? Where do we draw the line between ***exploitation*** and ***practically net positive***. If a X group of people is gonna die anyway, say in Ukraine or Gaza and some country say, ok, we have two choices, we do nothing and let them die or we use those people for super cheap labour and provide them enough money in return so they could buy enough food to be alive. The answer seems to be that one any business should not be done where the other party is in compromised position so that they are not agreeing to the business deal due to their dire situation. 



In the case of student visa, the answer seems that the Australian government should charge them a fee that is reasonable in a way that both parties are getting equal benefit, i.e. a true win win for both. Chat gpt gives the following keypoints of it's [full response](https://chatgpt.com/share/67d4f345-e7d4-800f-a94d-0ae3c36be11f) as following:



Main points for practicality and realistic solution: 



**Economic Argument (Win-Win Situation)**

    Australia benefits from international students because they pay more and contribute to the economy.

    Students benefit because they get access to better education and job prospects.



**Counterargument – Structural Exploitation**

    The pricing is not based on an equal exchange of value but rather on what international students can be made to pay due to visa dependence.

    Students from poorer backgrounds end up taking huge loans, creating a cycle of economic struggle.

My opinion: overall it seems the Australian govt takes far more net gain than the migrant, hence overall being a discriminatory process of taking advantage of someone. This is similar to a business, e.g. you sell medicine at a higher price to someone who is in need of that medicine. An exact answer with numbers is needed, e.g. actual economic gain by Australian in terms of dollars to properly verify Chatgpt argument.



Another discussion and key points with chat gpt: https://chatgpt.com/share/67d5101b-e41c-800f-a5ee-67f73950d14b



### Further research (Under construction) -- Google AI Content



Philosophically, immigration raises complex questions about rights, justice, and the role of the state, with arguments ranging from open borders based on freedom of movement to the right of states to control their borders for cultural or economic reasons. 

Here's a deeper dive into some key philosophical perspectives on immigration:

Arguments for Open Borders:



 Freedom of Movement:

 Some argue that individuals have a fundamental right to move freely across borders, and that states should not restrict this right. 



Equality and Justice:

Others argue that restricting immigration is unjust and violates principles of equality and fairness. 

Economic Benefits:

Some believe that immigration can bring economic benefits to host countries, and therefore should be encouraged. 



Arguments for Restrictive Immigration Policies:



 State Sovereignty:

 Some argue that states have the right to control their borders and determine who can enter their territory. 



Cultural Preservation:

Some believe that immigration can lead to the erosion of a country's culture and that states have a right to preserve their cultural identity. 

Economic Concerns:

Some worry that immigration can put a strain on social services and the job market. 



Key Philosophical Concepts:



 Self-determination:

 The idea that states have the right to govern themselves, including the right to control their borders. 



Human rights:

The idea that all individuals have certain fundamental rights, including the right to freedom of movement. 

Justice:

The idea of what is fair and right, and how resources and opportunities should be distributed. 

Equality:

The idea that all individuals are equal, regardless of their background or origin. 

Cultural Identity:

The idea that people have a sense of belonging to a particular culture, and that this culture is important to them. 



 Immigration - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

 10 May 2010 — The most popular argument for the permissibility and importance of closing borders to outsiders is that this exclusion ...



Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Strangers in Our Midst: The Political Philosophy of Immigration ...

States should be much more open to migrants than they currently are, these philosophers claim, or else they violate the universal ...

Oxford Academic

The Ethics of Immigration: Self‐Determination and the Right to ...

12 Feb 2013 — The ethics of immigration is a broad and expanding academic topic, encompassing various, complex philosophical issues r...

Compass Hub