ipl-logo

John Rawls Argument For Open Borders

469 Words2 Pages

Liberal traditions are significantly rooted in the argument for open borders. The concept of open borders can not be correctly understood without studying its liberalistic ways. John Rawls is a theorist whose ideas against immigration revoke the liberalism that surrounds open borders. However, the three thinkers who support open borders as liberalism are Joseph Carens, John Mill, and Sheyla Benhabib. Unfortunately, despite his veil of ignorance theory, John Rawls does not agree with open borders. Although the veil of ignorance has liberalistic-like ways, Rawls does not extend this part of his philosophy to immigrants. Instead, Rawls is more interested in using his philosophy for the purpose of securing and protecting nation-states.
On the other hand, Carens, Mill, and Benhabib …show more content…

The author’s first major argument is crucial to Carens’ belief of immigration because it suggests open-borders will allow people to control their faith by not becoming victims of their nation’s socioeconomic problems (page 259). Mill would agree with Carens’ belief that immigration does allow people to control their faith. As a result, Mill believes foreigners are doing what is deemed a necessity, so they may gain better livelihoods. The author is in support of this regardless if immigrants crossing the border do so illegally (because they are committing a wrongful act for the greater good of their lives). The greater good of their lives is easily defined as the pursuit of liberty, happiness, and property (page 86). Benhabib provides clarification to her readers on why Rawls’ immigration theory rejects liberalism. In the reading, Benhabib extracts several key quotes from Rawls’ philosophy on foreigners. A key concept from Rawls that caught my attention was his description of nation-states as a “complete” and “closed social system.” Moreover, he continues

Open Document