Whose "No Borders"? Achieving Border Liberalisation for the…
Whose "No Borders"? Achieving Border Liberalisation for the Right Reasons (Gill 2009)
3 positions of the no borders debate. 1. right-wing conservatives on basis of welfare, identity and jobs. 2. disagreement with the first where the benefits outweigh the negatives are underestimated. Economic efficiency with open borders. Gains to both sides from the liberal school of thought. 3. left wing commentators against capitalism is served by the immobility and mobility of the working class
I would suggest that it is both necessary and possible to counteract Right-wing conservatism and their tendency to conflate Left-wing and liberal positions, by supporting No Borders whilst also not relying upon the economic expediency of migration to middle-class Western interests . The following four suggestions would begin to characterize such a Left-wing No Borders approach:
Valuing people equally regardless of where they are born or reside, and remaining radically committed to supporting policies that confront the system of nationstates that threatens this equality . An insistence on this point would avoid the risk that arguments for mobility and freer borders are made with the objective of moving people with lower status into positions from which they can serve the needs and meet the demands of people with higher status more easily, which is clearly the risk that some liberal arguments run .
The Conflation of Liberal and Left-Wing ideology by the Conservative Right
The No Borders campaign is striking fear into the hearts of conservatives
The British no borers movement at least remains dis-aggregated, dispersed, out-numbered, underfunded but the open borders lobby stands against false imprisonment, unlawful detention and inhumane border control practices
The splintering, fracturing, and ideological disunity of the radical Left, and the ambiguity of its relationship to the No Borders lobby, rules out such cogency and influence .
Conservative right talk about migrants in the language of flooding, tidal waves, terrorists, lying, contagious disease
Some on the left see wage depressive effects
A critique of the conservative right position against free migration
Possibility nation-states will cede their authority to non-state forces and relinquish soverignty
However nation states often fail in programmes to control migration flows, difficulties in translating ideal policy stances into workable and effective migration policies.
The rights of migrants once they enter the countries
The volume of migration will be too high- take advantage of no borders, and living conditions would equalise between rich and poor countries. Especially citing the lowering of border control between Poland the rest of the EU. Undermining welfare and living standards, however sometimes exaggerated
The extent to which migrant workers reduce wages or native workers is unfounded
salience of mechanisms that produce socio-economic inequalities in recipient countries, which will favour the rich with or without the presence of No Borders and should be a source of comfort to middle-class conservatives who are concerned about the erosive effects of freer population movement .
The migrant as a carrier of disease. Western democracies exposed to biological attacks, however the ability to import people with medical knowledge, Westerners have access to superior medical facilities and medical human capital. And the numbers of people that move do not necessarily translate into greater risks
Arguments in favour of freer borders
Ethically, free movement, human rights can legitimately adjust to the social environment, including human mobility is both natural and ethical
Ethicalists look to the human rights infringements necessary to enforce closed borders. Proportion of migrants who die from militarisation of the US mexico border risen substaintally
Difficult conditions some migrants face, it is ethically indefensible to try to exclude them
Economic advantages no borders facilitates, freer movement of the factors of production increases economic efficiency
A reduction in national border controls would allow cities to expand and contract in response to the counterposed forces of agglomeration and dispersion50 without being subject to external regulation, thereby achieving a more efficient match between migration supply and demand .
No Borders promises to dispense with the inequitable compartmentalization of democracy into incomparable national units and would facilitate moves towards the equalization of the value and influence of votes cast around the world .
Challenges facing the no borders campaign
The notion has real appeal, radically increase democracy and move migrants from the positions of risk and marginality that currently occupy
One of the most persistent arguments given by conservatives in relation to No Borders is that international mobility does not serve the national interest . Either by depriving incumbent nationals of their jobs, reducing wages, or putting pressure upon domestic welfare systems, this notion is deeply persistent . There is a grave danger, however, in refuting this myth
Riley’s arguments appear to recognize and accept that some part of migrant populations will do the work that many Americans do not want to do and are overqualified to perform .
The migrant as a means to an end- American wealth creation
Seeing movement as a generally good thing worth defending
There are human limits to mobility, movement and transience, the disaffection that accompanies frequent movement
A further difficulty confronting the No Borders concept is that states are often objectified when calling for looser border controls . It is as if strict borders are the result of state intentions alone, implying that states have both the license and ability to repeal them . In fact, while border policies and migration laws are certainly enabled by states, they are generally reflective of deeper social causes that prompt states to implement and pursue such policies .
Western centrism . Calls for No Borders imply that Western countries are in some way more desirable locations than developing countries and, by wanting to migrate, migrants themselves confirm this suspicion .