David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 1 (2):159-180 (1998)
Can states' immigration policies favor groups with whom they are culturally and historically tied? I shall answer this question here positively, but in a qualified manner. My arguments in support of this answer will be of distributive justice, presupposing a globalist rather than a localist approach to justice. They will be based on a version of liberal nationalism according to which individuals can have fundamental interests in their national culture, interests which are rooted in freedom, identity, and especially in ensuring the meaningfulness of their endeavor. The prevalent means for protecting these interests is the right to national self-determination. Many believe that this right should be conceived of as a right to a state. I shall show that this conception of self-determination implies purely nationalist immigration policies. I shall present reasons for rejecting such policies, reasons which together with other reasons form a strong case against the statist interpretation of the right to self-determination. They form a strong case in favor of understanding self-determination as a bundle of privileges to which nations are entitled within the states dominating their homelands. Some of these privileges have to do with immigration policies. I shall argue for three principles which should regulate these immigration privileges and discuss the relation between them and Israel's Law of Return.
|Keywords||culture immigration liberalism nationalism self-determination|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Cara Nine (2008). The Moral Arbitrariness of State Borders: Against Beitz. Contemporary Political Theory 7 (3):259.
Cara Nine (2008). The Moral Arbitrariness of State Borders: Against Beitz. Contemporary Political Theory 7 (3):259-279.
Similar books and articles
Kris W. Kobach, Reinforcing the Rule of Law: What States Can and Should Do to Reduce Illegal Immigration.
John Exdell (2007). 5. Immigration, Race, and Liberal Nationalism. Radical Philosophy Today 2007:95-110.
Sune Lægaard (2010). What is the Right to Exclude Immigrants? Res Publica 16 (3):245-262.
Mason Richey (2010). Towards a Non-Positivist Approach to Cosmopolitan Immigration: A Critique of the Inclusion/Exclusion Dialectic and an Analysis of Selected European Immigration Policies. Journal of International and Area Studies 17 (1):55-74.
David B. Thronson, Custody and Contradictions: Exploring Immigration Law as Federal Family Law in the Context of Child Custody.
Mathias Risse (2008). On the Morality of Immigration. Ethics and International Affairs 22 (1):25–33.
Matthew Lister (2010). Immigration, Association, and the Family. Law and Philosophy 29 (6):717-745.
Peter Higgins (2009). Immigration Justice: A Principle for Selecting Just Admissions Policies. Social Philosophy Today 25:149-162.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads69 ( #62,152 of 1,907,930 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #271,804 of 1,907,930 )
How can I increase my downloads?