Sensible Thinking On Immigration From Immigrant Eugene Volokh
As @WalterOlson tweeted, "advocates of liberty can't afford to ignore the future-polity angle."
Constitutional scholar, law professor, and small "l" libertarian Eugene Volokh blogs at Volokh.com:
I sometimes pose for my liberal friends a stylized thought experiment. Say that they live in a country of 3 million people (the size of New Zealand) where 55% of the citizens are pro-choice and 45% are pro-life (1.65 million vs. 1.35 million). Now the country is facing an influx of 1 million devoutly Catholic immigrants, who are 90% pro-life. If these immigrants are let in and become citizens, the balance will flip to 2.25 million pro-life to 1.75 million pro-choice (56% to 44% pro-choice); and what my friends might see as their fundamental human right to abortion may well vanish, perfectly peacefully and democratically.It's unlikely that any constitutional protection will stand in the way: Even constitutions can be amended, and new judges can be appointed. Nor can one rely on "education" or "assimilation" -- what if the immigrants simply conclude that their views on abortion are just better than the domestic majority's? I think many of the current residents may rightly say "We have nothing against Catholics; but we don't want our rights changed by the arrival of people who have a different perspective on the world than we do."
Letting in immigrants means letting in your future rulers. It may be selfish to worry about that, but it's foolish not to. For America today, that's actually not that much of a concern, because we're a huge nation whose culture is already so mixed (for which I'm grateful) that even millions of immigrants won't affect it all that greatly, at least for quite a while. But for many smaller and more homogeneous countries, extra immigration means a fundamental change in what the country is all about, and perhaps what the citizens' lives and liberties will be like. And even for America, the influx of millions of new citizens -- both the potentially legalized current illegal immigrants and the many others who are likely to come in the wake of the legalization -- can affect the society and the political system in considerable ways. It seems to me eminently sensible to be concerned about the illegal immigrants who may well change (in some measure) your country even if your ancestors were themselves illegal immigrants who changed the country as it once was.
via @WalterOlson







11 million more Democratic voters = fast road to pure socialism. #illegalsgohome
mpetrie98 at February 17, 2013 11:12 PM
Catholic?
Try Muslim.
Radwaste at February 18, 2013 1:56 AM
> Letting in immigrants means letting in your
> future rulers. It may be selfish to worry
> about that, but it's foolish not to.
Or you could get over yourself. In my lifetime, the United States has accepted more immigrants than all the other nations of the world combined. (see)
Within the last ten generations or so, my family was included.
Important parts of immigration are all fucked up nowadays, but let's not be paranoid or dim.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 18, 2013 5:09 AM
'Sides, isn't Eugene first-generation?
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 18, 2013 5:10 AM
Demographics is Destiny.
MarkD at February 18, 2013 6:26 AM
See Rad's comment.
Much of western Europe will wake up one fine morning, and find themselves minorities in their own country, with a Muslim majority.
Hope y'all enjoy your coming sha'ria.
I R A Darth Aggie at February 18, 2013 6:54 AM
Think what Israel would become with a “right of return” for Palestinians. And here, in a country whose citizens had wanted limited and legal limited representation, they are being told that isn't possible because of the political implications of a demographic that is, to a large extent, the result of illegal immigration.
But it's not the existence of that demographic that's controlling the “debate.” The reality is that there is almost no actual debate because the main stream media is largely excluding those opposed to their immigration agenda. The news media is systematically keeping the country from hearing the arguments on immigration that threaten their agenda, like the one presented here. When when was it that the the country was asked and gave its consent to have itself so fundamentally changed by bringing in people from other countries?
jskdn at February 18, 2013 10:37 AM
It all depends where you live. Look at the Islamic taxi drivers in NYC that were able to get certain ads banned on their taxis.
Jim P. at February 18, 2013 1:16 PM
> minorities in their own country, with
> a Muslim majority.
If there as tamed as Christianity is on my neighborhood, I won't care.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 18, 2013 5:42 PM
They're. Sorry. I feel bad.
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 18, 2013 5:43 PM
But will they be as tame crid? I could have sworn I saw something on facebook about Dearborne muslims stoning people
lujlp at February 18, 2013 7:03 PM
You're head-over-heals in love; and by gum, if you can't win my affection, then you'll command my attention by rudeness! Every comment is an opportunity. YOU WILL NOT BE IGNORED!
Crid [CridComment at gmail] at February 19, 2013 5:21 AM
Leave a comment