In today's globalized world is the increasingly unrestricted movement of peoples across national boundaries blurring—indeed, rendering anachronistic—the whole concept of citizenship as we know it?
Most contemporary laws relating to immigration and citizenship reflect outmoded nation-state ideology and legal frameworks. Would it not be more realistic and humane to allow human beings to have the right to live anywhere in the world as long as they do not infringe on the rights and resources of others?
The wealthy have always been citizens of the world, traveling and living where they please; governments welcome those who come bearing cash regardless of national origin. More recently, a new breed of international technocrats, well-educated and traveled, move about the planet serving as university professors, business consultants, and high tech specialists.
This handful of privileged elites is only a small fraction of people on the move around the world, traveling from Morocco to Gibraltor, Manila to Hong Kong, Tiajuana to San Diego, Bangkok to Dubai and to hundreds of other entry points, legal and illicit. Most of these people are willing to leave their homes for nearly any type of work, often enduring hazardous and even inhumane conditions.
At present, labor mobility reinforces one of the harsher realities of free trade—the "race to the bottom," in which finding the cheapest, most compliant labor means quick profit. However, over time this exploited "bottom" will move to the "middle" and standards of living will rise. Production will become more efficient with competition based increasingly on the quality of human capital and on technological innovation—and less on exploitation.
The immigration question has reached a level of urgency in the United States where a bitter national debate is underway regarding who has the right to live and work in this country. Within our borders there are millions of people who have become "defacto citizens"—undocumented immigrants who have been here for decades. Many do almost everything citizens do—school their children, own homes, and run businesses—except vote, serve on juries, and run for office.
The inevitability of more amnesties will only confirm that populations will continue to move freely across national frontiers in response to economic incentives and other opportunities for improving the quality of life. The imperative for the United States and other host countries is to bring these "alien citizens" into the civic fold, using to good advantage not only their hands, but also their hearts and minds. Keeping them in the shadows will benefit no one.
While many countries persist in restrictive approaches to citizenship, the world is becoming more open and fluid. In the European Union people move freely from the Cliffs of Dover to the Bosporous responding to employment opportunities and lifestyle incentives.
The United States and Europe are not the only destinations for the world's poor. With a rapidly aging population, China will need to attract millions of new workers to fill its factories. After arriving in their new destinations of employment, this cheap labor will begin the problematic journey from being merely an exploited means of production to active participation in their new communities. The challenge for host countries will be to rise to a level of enlightened governance allowing rapid integration of these newcomers.
The EU and the United States are moving in the direction of letting residents, regardless of their nationality, vote in municipal elections and have a meaningful say in the running of the communities where they live. Is a revival of the ancient city-state idea with linkages to a larger regional entity the wave of the future? A political tug of war seems in the making where local autonomy will struggle with the need for national or global standards.
With their use of public resources exceeding their tax contributions, the overall economic contribution of undocumented immigrant workers comes at a price. But as their more educated offspring join the work force, they become a powerful economic engine that pays the costs of their parents many times over. And a small increase in the tax contributions of the wealthiest five percent of the population in the United States (who are richer now then ever before in American history) would more than cover these short-run costs.
Increased mobility of populations is a reality that should be welcomed, not resisted. The more we move at will and mix with other cultures, the more we feel comfortable with other people. The more we feel the "same", pursuing universal goals of happiness and well-being, the more we share similar values, the less strife we should see. It is our perceived differences that divide us, creating the sources of human conflict.
Sam Oglesby worked for many years in developing countries with the United Nations. His email is: ogl39@aol.com
Feeds