Free migration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Free migration or open immigration is the position that people should be able to migrate to whatever country they choose, free of monetary charge. Although the two are not the same issue, free migration is similar in spirit to the concept of free trade, and both are advocated by free market economists on the grounds that economics is not a zero-sum game and that free markets are, in their opinion, the best way to create a fairer and balanced economic system, thereby increasing the overall economic benefits to all concerned parties.[1] Many libertarians, liberals, socialists, and anarchists advocate open immigration, notwithstanding other noteworthy differences among these political ideologies.[2] From a Human Rights perspective, free migration may be seen to complement Article 13 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights: (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state. (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.[3]

Arguments against free immigration are usually cultural or security-related. Some arguments are nationalistic or what some critics claim to be "xenophobia",[4] or ones similar to arguments against free trade; for example, protectionism. Specifically, an influx of cheap labor could easily deflate wages for workers who are already established in a particular labor market, and have a negative impact on the standard of living for the more established workers. Other critics of free immigration are concerned that it would be unfair to current homeowners if an influx of new residents greatly brought down the property values and attractiveness of living in that location, or, alternatively, increased the demand to live in the city so much that the home owner would not be able to keep up with increased taxes from higher property values. However, free market economists believe that competition is the essence of a healthy economic system, and that any short-term negative impact on individual economic factors that is caused by free immigration is more than justified by the prospects of long-term growth for the economy as a whole.[5] Other arguments include the general impact on the environment, infrastructure, population density, governmental costs, immigrant criminality, incompatible culture of immigrants and overall quality of life decrease.

War-related chaos can lead to the breakdown of borders and allow for de facto free immigration. The natural attempts to flee strife, or escape a conquering enemy, can quickly lead to millions of refugees. Even where border controls are in place they can be overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of people. Once settled into refugee camps, these reluctant immigrants may take decades to be either repatriated back or naturalized into their new country. This has been the situation with the Palestinians in Jordan. During the Cold War, a migration paradox arose in which some of the communist states forbid emigration, while the "Free World" would freely accept the defectors. This policy persists for Cubans[6] and the Hmong, who are both allowed particular forms of free immigration to the United States based on their automatic refugee status.

Until the 20th century, the United States and Canada had policies that allowed for almost completely open immigration for Europeans. In the Immigration Act of 1924, the United States Congress adopted strict immigration controls, especially on those coming from outside western Europe. These rules were later relaxed in the 1965 Immigration Reform Act. Open immigration is now allowed within the European Union,[7] the Nordic Council, the European Free Trade Association (EFTA), the European Economic Area (EEA), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) (with exceptions and restrictions) and in some bilateral agreements, such the Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement between New Zealand and Australia.


See also[edit]

References[edit]

Further reading[edit]

  • Abizadeh, Arash. 2008. "Democratic Theory and Border Coercion: No Right to Unilaterally Control Your Own Borders." Political Theory 35.1: 37-65.
  • Bader, Veit. 2005. "The Ethics of Immigration." Constellations 12.3: 331-61.
  • Barry, Brian, and Robert E. Goodin, eds. 1992. Free Movement: Ethical Issues in the Transnational Migration of People and of Money. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
  • Blake, Michael. 2003. "Immigration." In A Companion to Applied Ethics, ed. R. G. Frey and C. H. Wellman. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Bosniak, Linda. 2006. The Citizen and the Alien: Dilemmas of Contemporary Membership. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Brubaker, W. R, ed. 1989. Immigration and the Politics of Citizenship in Europe and North America. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
  • Carens, Joseph H. 1987. "Aliens and Citizens: The Case for Open Borders." The Review of Politics 49.2: 251-73.
  • Chang, Howard F. 1997. "Liberalized Immigration as Free Trade: Economic Welfare and the Optimal Immigration Policy." University of Pennsylvania Law Review 145.5: 1147-244.
  • Cole, Phillip. 2000. Philosophies of Exclusion: Liberal Political Theory and Immigration. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Dauvergne, Catherine. 2008. Making People Illegal: What Globalization Means for Migration and Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Dummett, Michael. 2001. On Immigration and Refugees. London: Routledge.
  • Ethics and Economics. 2006. Volume 4.1. Special issue on immigration.
  • Gibney, Mark, ed. 1988. Open Borders? Closed Societies? The Ethical and Political Issues. New York: Greenwood Press.
  • Heath, Joseph. 1997. "Immigration, Multiculturalism, and the Social Contract." Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 10.2: 343-61.
  • Miller, David, and Sohail Hashmi, eds. 2001. Boundaries and Justice: Diverse Ethical Perspectives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Miller, David. 2005. "Immigration: The Case for Limits." In Contemporary Debates in Applied Ethics, ed. A. I. Cohen and C. H. Wellman. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Riley, Jason L. (2008). Let Them In: The Case for Open Border. Gotham. ISBN 1-59240-349-2. 
  • Schwartz, Warren F., ed. 1995. Justice in Immigration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Swain, Carol M., ed. 2007. Debating Immigration. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Torpey, John. 2000. The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship, and the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Velasco, Juan Carlos. 2012. “Movilidad humana y fronteras abiertas" In Claves de razon practica, 219: 28-35.
  • Walzer, Michael. 1983. Spheres of Justice: A Defence of Pluralism and Equality. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Wellman, Christopher Heath. 2008. "Immigration and Freedom of Association." Ethics 119: 109-141.

External links[edit]