| Zusammenfassung: | Abstract: How can liberal democracies justify the non-admission of immigrants? Standard arguments provided by nationalist, republican, utilitarian or communitarian approaches are difficult to reconcile with the universalistic premises of liberalism and its emphasis on individual rights. This paper suggests the following elements for an alternative view: First, any immigration policy has to respect certain rights of those who have been admitted. These include a right to secure residence, access to the rights of citizenship and substantial freedom of choice about cultural assimilation. Second, a general right of free movement across state borders is an inherently desirable goal of liberal politics. The right of emigration alone is not enough. Societies become increasingly mobile across state borders but migration rights remain tied to citizenship acquired by birth. Seen from a global point of view, this turns citizenship in wealthy liberal democracies into an aristocratic privilege. Third, concerns about internal and external security and cultural homogeneity in such societies are not sufficiently strong to warrant a generally restrictive or selective immigration policy. Fourth, however, free movement would not necessarily lead to a more equitable international distribution of economic resources and democratic liberties. Furthermore, it can thwart efforts of internal social redistribution within democratic welfare states. In conclusion, free international movement of persons should be asserted as a goal rather than as a "side constraint" of liberalism. Nevertheless, specific immigration rights can be derived from social ties of immigrants to receiving societies and from a commitment to respect human rights for non-citizens. Family reunification and admission of refugees must therefore be given strong priority in any liberal immigration policy.;
|
|---|