Metaphilosophy 40 (1):131-146 (2009)

Abstract: Michael Walzer and David Miller defend the authority of democratic states to determine who will be allowed entry and membership. In support of this view they have claimed that the domestic solidarity necessary for social justice is threatened by the unregulated influx of outsiders. This empirical thesis proves to be false when applied to the United States, where heavy Latino and Latina immigration is more likely to increase civic solidarity than to diminish it. Seen in this light, the positions of Jürgen Habermas and Carol Gould, giving human rights priority over democratic sovereignty in decisions about membership, cannot be criticized as utopian. Liberal philosophers can also defend open borders as a way to give oppressed peoples representation inside powerful countries where state decisions often threaten access to essential resources and basic freedoms in their home countries.
Keywords nationalism  immigration  race  human rights
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2009.01565.x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,581
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

On Nationality.David Miller - 1995 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Climate Migration and Moral Responsibility.Raphael J. Nawrotzki - 2014 - Ethics, Policy and Environment 17 (1):69-87.
Which Borders?Luke Maring - 2019 - Moral Philosophy and Politics 6 (1):133-146.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
166 ( #66,075 of 2,461,407 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #448,382 of 2,461,407 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes