This discussion looks at immigration through philosophical debates of democracy, coercion, and autonomy. There seems to be a fundamental contradiction between democratic state's border control and democratic legitimacy. First, I discuss the democratic legitimacy and the need for democratic justifications with the invasion of autonomy.Then, I discuss Arash Abizadeh's argument that border control is coercive and invades personal autonomy, and David Miller's response that border control does not amount to coercion, but is prevention. I conclude border control invades autonomy even if it is not coercive, and thus, democratic justifications are needed. Ultimately, I suggest that open borders should be encouraged because it is the better alternative to what is required of democratic justification for close borders.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:GEORGIA/oai:scholarworks.gsu.edu:philosophy_hontheses-1011 |
| Date | 04 May 2014 |
| Creators | Nguyen, Brenny B |
| Publisher | ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University |
| Source Sets | Georgia State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Philosophy Honors Theses |
Page generated in 0.0031 seconds