“The UK is free”, the Brexiteers cried in June of 2016. “We’re out! And into the world…”.
Unfortunately, Brexit (thus far) has meant and will continue to mean that the world is now less free to enter into the UK. Since 2016, we have been haemorrhaging immigrants at an amount of around 150,000 net (between the vote and Covid).
We have been neglecting our moral duty towards migrants and to the liberalisation of borders, which helps not only to better the lives of would-be migrants, but also to bring about our domestic prosperity. Immigrants enrich our culture and make us richer, and as liberals we have a moral duty to better the lives of those who seek it. Increasing the rate of immigration is a surefire way to fulfil this.
Immigrants enrich our culture by providing new perspectives as to how we should govern, communalise, and leisure ourselves. In our globalised society this is a new normal. By allowing immigrants into our society, they allow us to see our faults. And they also help us point out our victories. Our universities, for example, are cornerstones of immigrant culture.
Why do immigrants wish to partake in our education? Because it is made up of the great British and liberal values of empiricism, reasoning, and questioning: such things are illegal or verboten in many of the cultures from which immigrants come from. As Fred P Hochberg points out in his new book “Trade Is Not A Four Letter Word”, education endows its participants with the liberal culture which has proven so intoxicating for our society.
The economic benefits of open immigration can be most brilliantly summarised by Bryan Caplan, an economist who specialises in immigration economics. His book “Open Borders: The Science and Ethics of Immigration” underlines how immigrants fill our economies with a diversity of skills, highly driven individuals, entrepreneurs, and technicians.
He finds that they are eager to fill skill shortages, as the frantic attempt by the British government to recruit fruit pickers, nurses, and engineers has shown. As Ian Gardin et al pointed out: “in the UK if immigration had been frozen in 1990, real GDP in 2014 would have been around £175bn lower”. And therefore the quality of life we have enjoyed thus far would, too.
In addition, why should the government prevent me from having my Moroccan friend around for dinner? She arrives and pays for the services, the food at the airport, the transport, the hotel room, the utilities. If she becomes ill (most likely from my terrible cooking!) and does not have insurance, she will be charged by the NHS at full-whack. She, more than many of us, is self-sufficient. She must obey our laws on entering the jurisdiction and leave when her visa expires.
She harms no one by enjoying our culture, our services, our economy, yet she is scared by the government’s adoption of xenophobic rhetoric and may not come back. If she loves what she finds here, and is willing to follow our laws, then why should she be scared off by our immigration rules. We, as liberals, must stand up for these individuals and champion their concerns. We care not for where you were born, only what you want.
Sam Bowman has a fantastic riposte, standing somewhat upon the shoulders of Kant and Rawls. If our morality is universalist then it makes sense we see immigration from all participant’s perspectives. So, as Sam says, try to see immigration from the immigrant’s eyes. Why would they make the monumental effort to leave behind family, friends, comfortable circumstances (or persecution), and try to fold into a new society, a new set of laws, and a new culture? If they want to make such an effort, then who are we to deprive them of the fair-gotten gains? If, as a liberal nation, we do not seek to spread our values and our well-being to as many people as possible by allowing more people in, then are our values and ethics really that strong?
Our society is a great proliferator of wealth, freedom, and autonomy. We should allow as many people to access that as possible. The more people who participate and engage in it: the more we get. Wealth and prosperity are not zero-sum games. If there are people who beg and plead for liberty (see Hong Kong), then we should open our doors to them and let them have it, for it takes nothing from us. With regards to Hong Kong, this is an area in particular where the government has taken the right steps. But we must go further.
There are few arguments against the liberalisation of our immigration system that are not rooted in dogma. Immigration made this country a safe haven for those seeking shelter and a better life for their families. Long may it continue to be a beacon of hope.
