The ethics of immigration: Global justice, nationalism, and the Israeli Law of Return.

摘要

Immigration policy seems to lie beyond contemporary philosophy's best understanding of justice. Social contract theory begins with the assumption that a society exists; it cannot tell us who should be part of the social contract. Despite appearances, Rawlsian theory does provide standards for evaluating immigration policy. This dissertation shows that admitting refugees is an obligation of justice. More surprisingly, states must grant immigration permits to co-ethnics. Even more strikingly, there are circumstances when justice demands that individuals be denied admission based on their ethnicity.; I begin by establishing that Rawls's theory is not founded on moral principles of universal scope. Rather, 'justice as fairness' is an application to society of standards commonly used to evaluate the fairness of a contract. I then refute arguments claiming that Rawls's principles must be applied to the entire globe. Since principle 2(b) establishes a right to equal opportunity for social positions, if the "global justice" theorists' arguments are successful, then any immigration restriction whatsoever is, prima facie, unjust. I show that Rawls's principles are appropriate only when there is both economic and political cooperation.; Cosmopolitan theorists argue that we must, in fact, establish political institutions of global scope. I show that despite the increasing importance of trans-state economic and cultural interaction, maintaining the sovereign state system is legitimate. I outline suggestions for the system's reform rather than abandonment.; In Chapter Three, I sort out widespread confusion regarding ethnicity and ethnic-nationalism. I provide a conception of ethnicity that moves beyond the debate over its being "constructed" versus "primordial". I dispel pernicious associations, explaining the Nazi movement as Imperialist---not nationalist. I deal with claims that nations are a modern phenomenon rather than having an ancient past. I argue against theorists who claim ethnic-nationalism is a threat to equality, autonomy, and dignity. I reject contemporary "liberal nationalists" conceptualizations, and present my own understanding of ethnic-nationalism.; Finally, I examine ethnicity-based provisions and exclusions in Israeli immigration policy. My treatment is informed by an interim report of the Israeli Government Advisory Committee to Examine Immigration Policies, which I have translated and included as Appendix C.