Immigration’s Impact On Economics & Culture In 2 min
There’s a widespread misconception of about the economics of immigration, according to Professor Steve Davies.
Immigration creates a sense of fear, whether that’s immigrants taking local jobs, destroying economies, or disrupting the national culture, but Professor Steve Davies explains how most of these fears simply aren’t true.. Watch him discuss the predominant belief among economists about the topic.
Top Comments ( View All 3 Comments )
<aside class=”bbp-reply-to-quote”><div class=”bbp-reply-to-attribution”>Kyle Taylor said:</div><div class=”bbp-reply-to-body”><p>It’s unfortunate to see so many dislikes on a video in support of open immigration. Assimilation takes time, and I would hope that people who are committed at all to liberty would appreciate some diversity.</p>
Davies’s response near the end was that if immigrants refuse or fail to assimilate, then one should “emphasize individualism and the degree to which a modern free society is one where people are free to form and shape their own identity through the choices that they make and that should be true of everybody.”
I think statements like these are why libertarians are accused of being atomistic, and, ironically, is contrary to the sense of individualism promoted by F.A. Hayek in “Individualism: True and False.” That is,
true individualism affirms the value of the family and all the common efforts of the small community and group, that it believes in local autonomy and voluntary associations, and that indeed its case rests largely on the contention that much for which the coercive action of the state is usually invoked can be done better by voluntary collaboration need not be stressed further. There can be no greater contrast to this than the false individualism which wants to dissolve all these smaller groups into atoms which have no cohesion other than the coercive rules imposed
by the state, and which tries to make all social ties prescriptive, instead of using the state mainly as a protection of the individual against the arrogation of coercive powers by the smaller groups.
Perhaps I am reading too much into Davies’s statement, but it seems as though he doesn’t believe we really need these intermediary institutions between the individual and the state, that if we just assert our individuality we will be fine. I find it easy to get this sense in which promoters of open immigration tend to underemphasize the traditions on which a liberal society is based and just assume it will maintain those traditions no matter how much of that society is composed of individuals without such a tradition. Will a free-ish society be preserved if 200 million migrants (which is Bryan Caplan’s estimate of the number of individuals who would migrate to these United States if there were no restrictions), having no experience or tradition of living in such a society, settle in the US? What assimilation would occur if the number of migrants to the US were roughly 2/3 of the current US population?
It’s unfortunate to see so many dislikes on a video in support of open immigration. Assimilation takes time, and I would hope that people who are committed at all to liberty would appreciate some diversity.
Are Syrian refugees assimilating into European cultures?