Asklemmy

44656 readers

946 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Which country in your opinion has the best immigration policy and what would be the theoretical ideal immigration policy in your view? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 4 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 years ago* (last edited 4 years ago) (2 children)

It's not really about "what would be the best way". The best way is freedom of movement. There's no ethical or just reason someone should be able to travel freely between freely between Ankara and Istanbul, but not between Budapest and Istanbul.

I guess originally it was about customs. Everyone got searched at the border, so that all your goods could be taxed. Important people could get a passport to be exempt.

Nowadays, it's more about tracking people. For example if the CIA wants to kidnap Glenn greenwald, they know where to find him. He can't just flee to a different part of the world. They have other means or tracking people now, but this was one of the earliest.

Or is there any more fundamental reason for states to control migration?

I don't think it's about mass movement of workers disrupting the economy. Then they would put the borders within countries.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 years ago (1 children)

You might be surprised to hear that border checks and passports were actually (mostly) a response to a pandemic.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 years ago

I did not know that.

Redding your article, passports don't sound like an effective disease control measure. Sounds like the disease was used to justify a measure that was coming anyway.

Much like the tracking, surveillance being extended today, and like putting more personal data into passports and extending the places passports will be used.

These measures have been being pushed for a long time, but they can be moved along faster now.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 years ago

States like to control migration to maintain stability/the status quo.

This can be economic stability (e.g. many people move to a country to work can increase unemployment). Often states will only let people in that have skills that are in demand.

It can be cultural/social stability. Often there is a rise in xenophobia/racism when a country has a large amount of immigration (you could see this in many places in Europe). Increased xenophobia is great for the anti-immigrant and the not-so-covertly racist political parties.