Immigration and Globalization: Prosperity that Depends on Domestic Policy

Introduction

Today, the issue of a migration policy appears in a spotlight of American elites as well as the general public. The U.S. is considered to be a center of the biggest migration system in the world. Annually, a large number of people arrives to the country with a hope to find a new home and positive advantages. About 11-12 million of them stay here illegally. This situation suggests that borders for immigrants do not really exist. Restriction of movement is a violation of human rights. For these reasons, it can be stated that immigrants are not refugees; removal of restrictions on entry into a state supported by a wise domestic policy allows to strength cultural and economic interrelations that are the basis of the U.S. “soft power.”

Core Ideas of Hayter’s Article

The progressive article “The New Common Sense” (Hayter) focuses on immigrants’ problems and particularly on protection of human rights. The primary statements of Teresa Hayter’s research can be divided into two categories. The first group relates to the “immigration” phenomenon and the second one combines exculpatory approaches to the concept of “immigrants,” proving inevitability and advantages of their appearance. Thus, we emphasize the followings positions of Hayter:

• Immigration has existed at all times and it is a natural process that leads to a cultural, economic, and genetic exchange between Its restrictions are a violation of human rights to freedom of movement.
• Essentially, immigrants are people who leave their motherlands searching for better work conditions and payment; they could bring benefits to the states that accept them.

Personal Vision of Immigration Issue

The article gives an opportunity to observe the government’s position on immigration from the perspective of protection of human values. It gives numerous reasons to support most of the earlier underlined ideas. Nevertheless, endorsing Hayter’s attitudes, we would like to include the following ones:

• Globalization is an irreversible process that concerns all countries and spheres of human life.
• It is meaningless to impose restrictions on freedom of movement because it cannot stop a flow of migrants, it will make it backstreet.
• Only a sound domestic policy of the state can provide safe coexistence of the indigenous population and immigrants, providing magnification of general welfare.

Examining the subject of the research, we came to the conclusion that the author makes some generalizations, which are unacceptable from our point of view. She stresses economic migration and describes immigrants as refugees. In contrast to Hayter, we consider the ensuing:

• Immigrants are not refugees because their displacement could be connected not only with work purposes but also with other necessities to leave the country.

Extended Analysis of Hayter’s Ideas

Observation of Hayter’s arguments has significance for an explanation of our support for the majority of her ideas.

Immigration as a Natural Process that Exists at All Times

Migration has existed for centuries, thus populations of numerous countries have been formed by descendants of migrants. The researcher believes that this process is natural and logical. We support the author, insisting that a change of residence for different persons is caused by various reasons that have always been important. It is extremely difficult to confront this phenomenon. Migration is one of the brightest manifestations of a gyre of human resources and gene pool in general. It is just an embodiment of major freedoms: the right of choice and freedom of movement. Hayter mentions attempts of the European Union to protect key freedoms and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights signed 1948, stressing supported worldwide position on protection of immigrant protection.

Incomers and Leaving Motherlands Because of Economic Reasons

Hayter argues that the primary reason that pushes people out of their motherlands is a material need. We support her evidence that a very few people would voluntarily agree to leave their families and friends without undeniable reasons. The world’s wealth and prosperity attributes are unevenly distributed. Thus, the rich North attracts residents of the destitute South and the prosperous West appeals to immigrants from the non-homogeneous East.

Immigrants as a Source of Benefits to States that Accept Them

In addition, the expert says that immigrants can bring tangible benefits to the receiving country. For this case, she cites the example of the United Kingdom whose welfare, according to Gordon Brown’s statement, has increased significantly precisely because of arrivals from other states (Hayter). Numerous times, Hayter refers to such international organizations as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank, highlighting their justifiable assessment of the magnitude of immigrants’ labor.

Evidences for Personal Vision

Supporting the most of Hayter’s statements, we would like to correct and complete some of them. Our evidences of additional items based on our personal observations and researches are the following:

Globalization as an Irreversible Catchall Process

The author talks about globalization indirectly, without listing its intrinsic features. In fact, it focuses on economic aspects. Nevertheless, we would like to note that the U,S. “soft power” is not only economically attractive. Immigrants remain potential targets of the profound influence of American culture. Its image combined with a wide range of proposals makes it appealing to any visitor. Migration flows are part of the globalization process that cannot be stopped. That is why, it includes international totalization in an economic, cultural, and even political spheres.

Meaninglessness of Restrictions on Freedom of Movement

Hayter’s central argument is inhumanity of freedom restriction; thus, the state borders should be opened. We would like to extend this approach. Foreign policy confines could not be effective because people will always find roundabout ways. For example, using the services of such an international program as “Work and Travel,” numerous participants remain in the U.S. illegally. As a result, millions of people use different tricks and practice deception in order to reach the desired country. Consequently, alternative ways to keep control over migrants are required.

Wise Domestic Policy as a Guarantee of Safe Coexistence

This position is one of those that must be subjected to detailed examination and study. Closing borders to immigrants, in essence, means violation of human rights, deprivation of the possibility to move free around the world. However, cordiality to any type of immigrants could start an imbalance in the society. The arrival of potential citizens causes strain on transport systems, increase of competition in workplaces (which may lead to a depreciation of labor and reduce wages), problems with medical service etc.

In our view, the government should conduct sound domestic policies. For example, it can implement the followings measures: impose restrictions on admission to some posts for persons that have lived in the country less than a certain period of time, or have no special invitation to have such work; restrict financial assistance to those who consciously avoid employment. Initially, it is also necessary to define a core purpose of the person’s arrival in the country and to assist him/her in accordance with their objectives. Thus, improved and fair bilateral relations could be established.

Immigrants Are Not Refugees

In some aspects, our views diverge from Hayter’s ones. The expert describes immigration as a phenomenon of “escape” from one’s motherland because of financial difficulties. However, material need is not always an unaltered cause of the forced departure from the native country. Numerous highly educated and brilliant-minded people leave their homeland due to personal lack of development. There is no urgent need for money but there is a considerable demand for self-actualization. For instance, scientists who are interested in nanotechnology can be involved in Japan, medical scientists in Germany, experts on space industry in the United States and so on. Other people go far from their native country just to live in a place of their dreams because of deeply personal reasons. Thus, it is quite wrong contextually to equate immigrants with refugees.

Conclusions

Hayter’s article demonstrates almost complete understanding of the characteristics of immigrants, their part in economy of the country, and the international community’s attitude to their movements. We agree with the researcher that migration has always existed; today the nation-states are in decline; and globalization influences the world in numerous ways. We also believe that not only immigrants can benefit from such reestablishment but also the society to which they want to come. However, they should not be considered as refugees. Accordingly, we affirm our position and call for open borders and adoption of sound domestic policies on immigrants.