Disqus - Latest Comments for Matthew Tievsky

Re: Douthat’s Populist Nationalism

Matthew Tievsky — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 14:32:55 -0000

So once an alien becomes a citizen, I take it you value his welfare as much as anyone born a citizen. But until then, you value his welfare less...and that is how you justify not allowing him to become a citizen.

That's a catch-22, and it strikes me as morally perverse.

Re: Douthat’s Populist Nationalism

Matthew Tievsky — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 14:50:05 -0000

Is there a better argument than "everyone is doing it"? (And I don't think the U.S. did until the 20th century, FWIW.)

Mind you, I think you can support some immigration restrictions without basing them on the flawed logic I spelled out above. But not protectionist immigration restrictions.

Re: Douthat’s Populist Nationalism

Matthew Tievsky — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:55:06 -0000

bjkad: "If you want a simpler argument: economic nationalism is just individual selfishness writ large. It is perfectly consistent."

No, because the nation isn't unanimous in its choice of immigration policy. E.g., a primary reason there's conflict over this issue is that some Americans want to employ certain immigrants and other Americans don't want to allow that, each group acting in its own self-interest.

Re: Douthat’s Populist Nationalism

Matthew Tievsky — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:05:39 -0000

This gets us back to WW's original post. The point isn't that American policy must always equate aliens and citizens, in every context. The point is that it's particularly pernicious to coerce citizens, and justify that coercion on the ground that aliens are worth less than citizens.

In other words, it is objectionable to force citizens to discriminate against aliens on the ground that aliens are worth less.

Re: On the Brain Drain Refrain

Matthew Tievsky — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 17:12:52 -0000

Chris: "How can you have as much moral responsibility for people that you do not have as much political authority over?"

Maybe you don't. But my--and perhaps Will's--response is that you have the RIGHT to treat aliens as well as (if not better than) your countrymen. Thus, restricting immigration to effect protectionism is wrong.

Re: Guest Workers and The Ultimate Liberal Aim

Matthew Tievsky — Sun, 30 Dec 2007 18:53:03 -0000

Thank you, Will--a very valuable article that changes how I think about the issue of guest worker programs.

Re: Ron Paul: Good for “the Blacks”?

Matthew Tievsky — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:14:06 -0000

Marvelous post.

Re: New on Free Will: Polluting the Polls with Jason Brennan

Matthew Tievsky — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:49:21 -0000

In theory, I agree with Brennan's argument. But I'm not sure that voters can reliably identify when they are incompetent to vote.

Re: The Principles of Weisbergian Political Economy

Matthew Tievsky — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:10:13 -0000

I'm pretty sure you're misreading the first passage. Will's not stating that's what he actually believes. Rather, Will's arguing that it is true if you accept Weisberg's logic.

Re: One Night of Romance

Matthew Tievsky — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:17:13 -0000

Well said.

Re: The Perversity of Legacy

Matthew Tievsky — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 10:15:01 -0000

Secession pre-dated Lincoln's inauguration, but the war did not begin until afterwardn (at Ft. Sumter) . Whatever the merits of the Civil War--and they are substantial (for freeing the slaves, not for preserving the unity of the state--wars for land are odious things)--it was largely a war of Lincoln's choosing, and it's that war that made him "great."

Re: APPLYING FOR AN H-1B VISA THIS YEAR? KNOW ANYONE WHO IS?

Matthew Tievsky — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 17:44:49 -0000

Not So Fast: "It's not an issue of any kind of justice. The government's responsibility is to it's own citizens, and 1.) it doesn't owe foreign nationals a Goddamn thing, and 2.) there is not now, and never has been, any right to enter a sovereign nation you are not a citizen of."

Apparently, then, you believe there's nothing immoral about, e.g., allowing only white people to immigrate.

Re: APPLYING FOR AN H-1B VISA THIS YEAR? KNOW ANYONE WHO IS?

Matthew Tievsky — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:49:54 -0000

Your "answer" comes off as evasive because you toss back rhetorical questions and refer to a general "right to estabilsh criteria," which I'm not challenging. I'm asking very specifically:

Is there anything unjust about an American immigration policy of admitting only white people (not too different from what we've had in the past)?

I really can't tell your answer from your previous comment. Yes or no?

Re: APPLYING FOR AN H-1B VISA THIS YEAR? KNOW ANYONE WHO IS?

Matthew Tievsky — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:01:07 -0000

From the premise that the distribution of visas is an issue of justice, it does not follow that we must allow totally unrestricted immigration and naturalization. (E.g., I think all of us here would endorse restrictions upon immigrants' voting rights. I think what Will's primarily arguing against is using immigration law as a means of labor protectionism.) So whereas I agree you've made some points that support some restrictions upon immigration, you haven't defeated Will's major premise, which is merely that immigration restrictions MUST BE JUSTIFIED by legitimate concerns (including some you've alluded to).