Many people have an interest in preserving the culture of the country they live in. Some are concerned that the culture could be disrupted if many immigrants arrive. To some, this justifies restricting immigration.
But just because we have interest in something, that doesn’t mean we have a right to use harmful force to obtain it. For example, suppose I need a liver transplant, but there are no willing donors available. Even though I have a very strong interest in obtaining a liver, that doesn’t mean I can force someone to give one to me.
Does our strong interest in preserving our culture justify our use of harmful force against potential immigrants, preventing them from entering the country? In his essay Is there a right to immigrate? Michael Huemer uses the following scenario to help us think about this question.
[S]uppose that a number of your neighbors have been converting to Buddhism or selling their homes to Buddhists. Because of this, your neighborhood is in danger of being changed from a Christian to a Buddhist community. The Buddhists do not coercively interfere with your practice of your own religion, nor do they do anything else to violate your rights; still, you object to the transformation, because you would prefer to live among Christians. If you catch on to what is happening in the early stages, are you ethically entitled to use force to stop your neighborhood from becoming Buddhist? Consider a few ways in which you might go about this. You might forcibly interfere with your neighbors’ practice of their religion. You could go to their houses, destroy their Buddha statues, and replace them with crucifixes. You could force your neighbors to attend Christian churches. You could forcibly expel all Buddhists from the neighborhood. Or you could forcibly prevent any Buddhists from moving in. All of these actions seem unacceptable. Hardly anyone would accept the suggestion that your interest in preserving a Christian neighborhood either negates or outweighs your neighbors’ rights not to be harmfully coerced by you.
This scenario focuses on religion, an important part of culture. There are many other aspects of culture, and the conclusion is the same. Using force to prevent your neighbors from speaking a different language, wearing unusual clothes, or listening to unfamiliar music is as unacceptable as using force against your neighbors (or potential neighbors) to prevent your neighborhood from changing from Christian to Buddhist.
These examples suggest that our interest in preserving the culture of our neighborhood doesn’t justify using harmful force against others. Similarly, our interest in preserving our country’s culture doesn’t justify our use of force to prevent foreigners from entering the country and drastically improving their lives.
Questions
- Can I use force to prevent Buddhists from moving to my neighborhood because I don’t want it to change from being a Christian neighborhood to being a Buddhist neighborhood?
- Can I use force to prevent foreigners from entering the country because I don’t want them to disrupt my country’s culture?