Presentation Title

A Non-Ideal Critique of Migration Debate

Presenter Information

Bernard GranadosFollow

Faculty Mentor

Dr. CORY ARAGON

Start Date

23-11-2019 10:30 AM

End Date

23-11-2019 10:45 AM

Location

Markstein 209

Session

oral 2

Type of Presentation

Oral Talk

Subject Area

humanities_letters

Abstract

Transnational forces, such as the global economic order and the climate crisis, limit and constrain the possibilities of certain people to ensure their survival. The literature on the ethics of admissions, or whether a state is morally justified to control immigration, narrows its focus to moral wrongs migrants commit against the state, or against a groups’ right of self-determination. The current framework focuses on applying competing conceptions of justice to debate the nature of the moral justification of a state’s right to control immigration. I argue that the status-quo/current framework insufficiently accounts for the structural practices and institutions in its theorizing about justice in the migration debate. Taking into account the structural forces that create the conditions for migrants to seek refugeehood/asylum complicate the idealization that the status-quo framework invites. As a result, the status-quo framework is ill-equipped to address the more pressing ethical issues surround the migration debate in a non-ideal world. Although the ethics of admissions poses some morally relevant questions about a state’s right to control migration, such a framework insufficiently accounts for the structural practices and institutions that create unjust conditions for migrants. Thus, incorporating structural forces into theorizing about migration will be beneficial for at least two reasons: (i) structural forces can be considered as non-ideal conditions that push against idealized assumptions made by the status-quo framework; (ii) structural forces focus on conditions in the world as they are, thereby having more traction in normative theorizing.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Nov 23rd, 10:30 AM Nov 23rd, 10:45 AM

A Non-Ideal Critique of Migration Debate

Markstein 209

Transnational forces, such as the global economic order and the climate crisis, limit and constrain the possibilities of certain people to ensure their survival. The literature on the ethics of admissions, or whether a state is morally justified to control immigration, narrows its focus to moral wrongs migrants commit against the state, or against a groups’ right of self-determination. The current framework focuses on applying competing conceptions of justice to debate the nature of the moral justification of a state’s right to control immigration. I argue that the status-quo/current framework insufficiently accounts for the structural practices and institutions in its theorizing about justice in the migration debate. Taking into account the structural forces that create the conditions for migrants to seek refugeehood/asylum complicate the idealization that the status-quo framework invites. As a result, the status-quo framework is ill-equipped to address the more pressing ethical issues surround the migration debate in a non-ideal world. Although the ethics of admissions poses some morally relevant questions about a state’s right to control migration, such a framework insufficiently accounts for the structural practices and institutions that create unjust conditions for migrants. Thus, incorporating structural forces into theorizing about migration will be beneficial for at least two reasons: (i) structural forces can be considered as non-ideal conditions that push against idealized assumptions made by the status-quo framework; (ii) structural forces focus on conditions in the world as they are, thereby having more traction in normative theorizing.