Filters, Fences or Faces Migration and the moral status of borders Luke Bretherton

1
Filters, Fences or Faces?Migration and the moral
status of bordersLuke Bretherton

• Strangers no Longer, April 20th 2007
• University of Notre Dame, London Centre

2
1. Introduction

• Borders good or bad?
• A summary of the argument
• those who argue for opening up borders see
  borders as a filter to keep out the bad and
  corrupt but at the same time, let in any
  individual who seeks to live in this land.
• Those who argue for closing our borders see
  borders as a fence, a system of security and
  defence that protects and preserves what is
  inside from what is outside.
• I want to argue that borders are a face we turn
  to the world around us which tells them what kind
  of country we are and how we want to relate to
  those around us and whether we are hostile or
  hospitable.

3
1. Introduction

• Mass migration politically morally problematic
• It is politically problematic because it involves
  crossing borders between different nation-states
  and therefore it involves the re-negotiation of
  the fundamental political and legal status of the
  individual concerned.
• Migration is morally problematic because current
  immigration policies adopted by all nation-states
  favour the needs of the strong (the existing
  members of a polity) over the weak (asylum
  seekers and vulnerable economic migrants).

4
2. Open or closed borders

• Three basic philosophical approaches
• Liberal utilitarians
• Deontologists
• Communitarians
• Racist nationalist arguments - not
  directly considered

5
3. Borders as filters

• Peter and Renata Singer argue on a utilitarian
  basis that immigration policy in general and
  refugee policy in particular should give equal
  consideration to the interests of all those
  affected and where the interests of different
  parties conflict (i.e. where the needs of
  existing citizens conflict with the needs of a
  refugee) priority should be given to those with
  the most pressing claim to have their needs met
  (i.e. the refugee or economically vulnerable).

6
3. Borders as filters

• Joseph Carens, from a deontological perspective,
  argues that free movement is essential for the
  realisation of an individuals other liberties
  and thus should be considered as a basic human
  right with open borders a direct implication of
  this right.

7
3. Borders as filters

• Michael Dummett argues that the requirements of
  justice are such that all states ought to
  recognise the normal principle to be that of open
  borders, allowing all freely to enter and, if
  they will, to settle in, any country they wish.

8
3. Borders as filters

• Summary
• Border controls in their view place a higher
  value on the existence of one particular
  community say Britain than on the value of an
  individual and their human rights. For them
  borders should allow free passage of individuals
  from one place to another while acting as a
  filter to keep out violent and criminal
  individuals.

9
3. Borders as filters a theological critique

• An abstract universal love I am indifferent to
  that which constitutes a German or a Frenchman
  because I will only the good of all mankind. -
  Liebniz
• A particular love of particular people in
  particular places the parable of the Good
  Samaritan
• Oliver ODonovan notes It is essential to our
  humanity that there should be always foreigners,
  human beings from another community who have an
  alternative way of organising the task and
  privilege of being human, so that our
  imaginations are refreshed and our sense of
  cultural possibilities renewed.

10
4. Borders as fences

• Michael Walzer the primary duty of care that
  members of a political community owe to each
  other is the communal provision of security and
  welfare. Maintenance of security and welfare,
  which inherently involves maintenance of the
  community itself, justifies entrance policies

11
4. Borders as fences

• Michael Gibney The claims of migrants and
  refugees must be balanced against the need for
  states to protect the institutions and values of
  the liberal democratic state. He states
  liberal egalitarian principles can only be
  realised in communities where relations amongst
  citizens are characterised by solidarity and
  trust, relations which develop over time and can
  be jeopardised by large, short-term changes in
  membership.

12
4. Borders as fences

• Summary
• For Walzer and Gibney, a particular liberal
  democratic state is a good thing in and of itself
  that needs upholding and protecting mass
  migration can threaten the existence of this good
  thing and so morally we need border controls to
  be fences protecting preserving what is inside
  them.

13
4. Borders as fences a theological critique

• Wolfhart Pannenberg argues that the cultivation
  and upholding of a distinctive national life
  cannot be an end in itself but must be
  subordinated or come second to the concern for an
  international order of justice and freedom.

14
4. Borders as fences a theological critique

• Wolfhart Pannenberg states that nations and
  union of nations (e.g. EU)
• Should be orientated beyond their own bounds
  towards the idea of an order of justice and peace
  that should one day include all humanity, that
  is, not only the world of our friends but also
  our present enemies. Thus this sequence of
  specific unions, which must have their beginnings
  in the internal political life of each people
  that is involved points toward the universal
  goal of a peaceful world that encompasses all
  mankind.

15
5. Borders as a face we present to the world

• Summary
• To think of borders in terms of the metaphor of
  the face re-orientates us to see there is value
  to be placed upon the existing community but the
  existing community is not an end in itself but is
  only fulfilled as it moves beyond itself and
  comes into relationship with those around it.
• Borders are a means of framing and structuring
  this relationship and orientating Britain to the
  rest of the world in a way that presents an
  enquiring, confident, hospitable face rather than
  either a closed, insular, hostile face turning
  away from relationship or a hopeless, insecure
  face that is abused and lacks a sense of
  self-worth.

16
Filters, Fences or Faces?Migration and the moral
status of bordersLuke BrethertonDept.
Education Professional Studies