The Global Philosopher: Should borders matter? BBC News

my name is Michael Sandel welcome to this first episode of the global Philosopher's Lina in Germany Lina what do you say why does it have to be nation why can't it be the fact that we all have stripy t-shirts or that we like teg where you're being cynical tomorrow Lina but you're being cynical towards it today we take up one of the most fraught moral and political questions of our time the question of immigration few issues generate more heated debate but we rarely discuss the big philosophical questions underlying this debate should national borders matter and if so why to discuss this question we've gathered a group of people from around the world not philosophers but thoughtful citizens from a great many places and we're engaged together in an experiment participants from over 30 countries are beamed up on these screens and will join in our discussion in addition to the people visible here in the studio hundreds more are watching online and will send comments by text as the discussion proceeds the first question I would like to put to our global group of discussions is about the distinction if any between how countries should treat refugees and how countries should treat immigrants now refugees traditionally are defined as people who are fleeing war or persecution whereas immigrants may be seeking admission to a country for any number of reasons perhaps for greater economic opportunity let's begin with the following poll question about refugees does a country have a right to deny entry to a refugee who arrives at its border fleeing war or persecution 86% say no a country does not have the right to refuse admission to a refugee now I'd like to put another question to you does a country have a right to deny entry to an immigrant who arrives at its border fleeing dire poverty or economic hardship yes or no 42% say no tarah in the US I think the difference for myself is that in any country we have people living in poverty and you cannot control for that all the time you can't save everyone but when someone's coming in need of actual safety in it's a matter of life or death then I think that that's a little different for myself thank you for that in Greece Andrew Leakey what do you think about this hello it's a great honor to be here with everybody I think that opportunity's there everywhere no matter where somebody is I think it's up to the individual to find them going to a richer country doesn't always guarantee success I mean we have all witness you know it immigrants ending up living in worse conditions than you know so we found the ones they previously lived in and besides I think that an immigrant has the money to flee his country his or her country actually so I think that up to the individual to decide whether or not this is a risk worth taking okay so if I if I hear you right Angelique you say the difference is it's a humanitarian emergency in the case of the refuge gee but in the case of the economic migrant that person might be able to realize to find greater economic opportunity in a great many countries so there's not the same kind of emergency in Brazil Leo what do you say I was an illegal immigrant myself let me refill that and I spent three months in a detention center before I was deported back to Brazil from the UK for being there legally and despite of all that happened to me about this immigration matters people believe that some countries some European countries have the right to take unilateral actions what kind of it cannot night when she moves abroad looking for a better life the real big deal migrants we're talking about are refugees which are free from political persecution and religious intolerance and things like that these migrants are the ones which we know among them there will be some dangerous okay well let let this is this is very powerful testimony Leo because if I hear you right what you're saying is that you yourself for an economic migrant to Britain and that you were forced to leave you were deported is that right that's right but I don't blame the UK boy they just do just do their jobs okay no this is a pretty powerful story in Germany Lina what do you think of Leo's story Oh first of all obviously I think it's great that you've got a personal opinion to tear on this rather than me talking theoretically but I don't think it's a question of countries I don't think it's a question of resources as Tara you called it earlier that aren't enough for all of us because I think in the world we've got space for all of us and we've got enough resources for all of us and I think we're making it too easy for ourselves and we say this country is full or this country doesn't have any more to give plus I think Germany for example has an awful lot more to give so I think we just have to stop thinking about countries stop thinking about races stop like thinking about religions and all these issues and just say there's one world there's people living in it and I think there's enough for all of us here it's a very generous sentiment you've expressed Lina but are you suggesting that national borders ideally from a moral point of view should not be enforced in fact should be overcome in terms ok so Lina has a very strong view that there is no moral significance to national borders that ideally we should regard one another as human beings not as members of this or that country and therefore you would favor completely open borders would you Lina all right who disagrees with Lina and would like to reply in ok in India City Hendra you disagree with Lina tell us why yeah I'd like I'd like to just preface my answer with something that we have always been told as children we've always been told that the world is a global village and that the earth is our planet and that we have the independence to stay wherever we can but the truth of the matter is that the reason why some countries become popular destinations for living is because they do some things right today if people choose to live in countries like Switzerland like Germany like US and UK it's because they do some things much better than other countries in the UK Simon what do you think I think we were the really serious and sacred moments in our human story hence we either see ourselves as brother or other and I can agree more with what lien has been saying but we're all natives of this earth and I think that the globalization the economy knows no borders climate change knows no borders as well so the moral argument the logical argument just falls down and it shows for me how obsolete the nation centric entitlement we're in such a privileged position to be able to say yes to you know to you who do we think we are it's time that we either listen to the likes of Donald Trump or we look into the children so eyes in Calais in Dunkirk and we say that we are one global family together and it's open up our hearts open up our homes open up our borders so Simon and Lena favor a universalistic ethic that regards humanity not members of Nations is the relevant moral considerations and Lena and Simon are arguing that we should I we should overcome the the use in the emphasis and the enforcement of national borders I'd like now to hear from people who disagree with that idea in Israel Basel thank you the very existence of a state was based on the presumption that if there is no controlling state if there's no controlling Authority then everybody would kill everybody because that's just the laws of nature and otherwise when we think about it morally I personally cannot live comfortably with somebody who doesn't speak my language who doesn't have my own culture we do not share the humor we don't share the same cultural background so nullifying national borders would really mix everybody with everybody and there would be no culture there would be no national heritage for any country for any person to just say that this is who I am they would no person would be able to more than you find themselves so that is very very dangerous all right um in Brazil now what would you say actually I agree with plasm because I think the word already had a lot of difference so I think the borders is some way to organize that to allow us to to live with the people are most like us to live with the people who are most like us is what national orders enable us to do Joe says in Brazil and that's a good thing No who says no who says no in in Italy in Italy Giuseppe says no I say what I can say for example in Italy if you take Italy people living in north of Italy as culture culturally more close to German people than to people living in the south of Italy a very famous statement from a politician in Italy when Italy has been built they sayi say now we have done Italy we have to do Italians meaning that we came from very very difficult cultures so all the reason is seen to defend borders are only a cultural economical logistical reason but I don't see really a moral reason borders come from war or if you take the plan the map of Africa you see straight line put by someone say ok this is one state this is another one ok so so just happens just a page reply is national borders are the result of accident contingency of war so how can they have any moral significance that's giuseppe's challenge in the u.s. in Wisconsin Mitra one is historically if you look at humanity our history is a history of migration I mean humans as long as they have been able to move they have moved across the planet this is one planet I mean look at Europe they have been working the last several decades or so trying to open borders language because they understand there is no more reason for the borders also understand people if they are comfortable where they are they will they are not willing to give up their families their own cultures their own beliefs to move halfway across the world so that they can survive in one way or another I'm an immigrant and trust me I understand that it's not easy to move up uproot yourself up rope your entire family and go somewhere else learn a new language to learn a new way of life halfway across your life corporations are also aiming immigrants if corporations can easily move across borders I cannot see why humans cannot aha if corporations can move across borders why not first may I ask you mentioned that you are an immigrant yourself from what country I - the United States from Iran from Iran yes ok now let's go to Dave the BBC who's been monitoring the comments from those who are watching online we've got hundreds of comments coming in Alistair from South Africa is puzzled by the difference between inequality between countries and inequality within a country he asks if you allow free immigration where do you draw the line living in a very unequal society like South Africa would he alice' have to allow someone from a nearby township to move into his house and Heitor we don't know where she's from height up says the borders signify more than just geography they indicate IDI which people thought cultural history and national belief there are others who have thoughts about this but I want to call upon you in whip I look after we look at two of the reasons people have raised in defense of borders one argument in the defense of preserving and enforcing national borders is to do with standards of living protecting jobs at home protecting wages from erosion if immigrants come and compete for jobs standards of living we often hear that public services will be strained welfare provision will be strained if immigrants come and take advantage so that of those services so that's one argument economic arguments of various kinds to do a standard of living GDP and then we've heard a different argument which is about culture history shared traditions I would like to see what this group thinks about these two different arguments in favor of national borders two arguments in favor of restricting immigration in some circumstances who thinks that national identity preserving national identity is a legitimate reason to restrict immigration in romania arenäôt tell us why I think that preserving national identity is something which has been done by our predecessors for long centuries and this is something which identifies us and in Kenya Deborah you have take into consideration that some some countries do not have any nationality to preserve so for me the issue of restricting our immigration based on that does not put water and I'm from a perspective of African countries which were gobbled up together without any regard for nationality I mean nation would rather so in this regard this national identity does not arise and speaking as a Kenyan I don't see that the fact that we have some one place in the country Sudanese in the country oh these are the refugees I'm looking I'm looking at the fact that we have them have has not affected our Kenyan mess or lack there so in my opinion this is not a reason for country to restrict immigration and and that's in part because you view national borders as artificial to begin with absolutely yeah yeah totally unnecessary in Athens Christine what do you think I think that the national identity is very very important four countries that have combination because combination is a constituted kamini community of people with common traditions common customs common ethnicity so by allowing everybody to enter our borders yes I do believe that this will destroy the special National Guard that characteristics so Christine has cited national identity shared culture shared ethnicity as what makes countries distinctive what holds them together and that's a reason to defend borders in to enforce borders now Simon earlier on Simon in the UK you argued against the moral significance of national borders let's see if we can put Simon and Christine together on the screen speak directly to Christine and in Athens and see if you can persuade her well I'd say Christine that in Britain here we we're often cited by politicians about British values but any kind of national identity if it doesn't contain compassion for all and openness to all the identity the brand has no credibility whatsoever the very idea of a national identity is oxymoronic it needs to include all otherwise it's simply not credible in the globalized world in which we live you think there is no such thing as a national identity III think that it's the only credible national identity is one that opens its arms to to others that doesn't see itself as privileged or entitled in any way or or or or sees others as less worthy of being on this earth than the rest of us I wonder if I could hear from someone here who defends the idea of restricting immigration for the sake of national identity who can articulate what he or she takes to be the idealism of that position in Greece angeleka I would like to underline this which I think escapes escapes us all without being specific there are certain religions which are which are disguised political movements okay they provide no education to their people they oppress especially females in their countries they brainwash their citizens okay and all these people okay they want to invade and if you want corrupt City my countries with their own identity so you do think so you do think that I that preserving national identity is in we've had a lot of comments coming in from those who are watching online let's turn to Dave at the BBC what are they saying we had a comment from yang in the hey who says that preserving national identity is the reason racists give for restricting immigration there be many comments about the pace of change Beth from India says there's a huge difference between a gradual change to identity over fifty years and an enormous change which takes place in a short period with a big burst of immigration and eligio says but we should remember that melting a national identity with new arrivals can actually enrich an identity thank you for that in Israel you did yeah what do you what do you say I think Simon was presenting this this one criteria for for being a legitimate you know national identity I think that at some people let's strive to have a sense of connection to culture of heritage of family so to come and say that it's only legitimate to have a national identity which it is an all inclusive and encompasses all citizens of the world I think it's ignoring the very fundamental fact as a human being that we do connect to things that are similar to us on an emotional level at least this is not a really logical arguments so you have to not disregard the emotional connection people have to things that are similar Jim you disagree with Simon and with of course Lena that we should transcend these differences yeah I wouldn't say I completely I wouldn't say I completely disagree I would say that you cannot disregard the fact that people strive to feel connected to something it's not only a universal world that's part of it but it's also a sense that people want to feel connected and you can completely disregard that like why is that any different than just wanting to be part of everything Lena in Germany Lena what do you take why does it have to be nation why can't it be the fact that we all have stripy t-shirts or that we like to eat cheese you know what I mean or we we miss the baby you're being cynical tomorrow Lena but you're being cynical towards it it's not it's not stripy t-shirts a person has a culture and heritage it's not something education you're just you're responding in a very cynical matter some people have connections we have attachments the things that are like us not forc just you know no slow sensible rigid go ahead Lena mr. Vall I've got four grandparents from four countries so which of these countries am I supposed to identify myself with I don't know that's a question might be t-shirts for me it's not about a country it's about the fact that I feel strongly about let's say feminism sure yeah I'm connected with feminists across the world I feel strongly about children so I like people who like children it doesn't have to be people who also happen to have a German passport another point that I think is very important is we mustn't forget that nationalism and religion and culture and all these things have been used time and again as a reason to discriminate people to kill people Germany not so long ago said you know what you group of religious people no longer part of our country you're not citizens anymore as a reason to think we were then allowed to do whatever with them so I just think there's a massive risk to creating these kind of us and them ideas and and I don't care if it's try potentially just angry thing we don't wait wait wait wait go ahead finish your thought Lena I just think that essentially would we don't really disagree I think that it's a legitimate idea to want to be a citizen of the world but it's also a legitimate idea to want to be a citizen of my city of my hometown and to find that balance between between nationalism on a global scale and nationalism on an urban scale for instance is not a disagreement but you have to be able to accept both ideas yeah all right I want to try to wait wait wait wait wait wait I bet there are a lot of people who are diving in at once I am in the UK you are a serial immigrant to the UK is that right tell us what you've learned from your experience about the debate we've been having I would like to ask everyone say that the coast should say no for the immigrants can you imagine you're living in a city of gums aging the diseases or illnesses surrounding few who on your pump can you imagine having a child in need of urgent medical care this is how hundred thousand of the big board especially the Syrians are being made to experience everyday I think the countries don't have the right to say not for the refugees when we say about the humanitary right the countries don't have the right to say no at some time the people who are saying that refugees will be like a mother would be bald I am disagree with this with the same eyes because now I have been in the UK one year now I am studying elmore Appling tier with poor organization one of them is national complete our study for the self life for our children not just for two found assembled life for us well thank you for joining us you broke up a little bit there I know there are others with things to contribute but let me see if I can draw together some of the strands of the discussion that we've heard here today and to see how it all connects to the debates that are raging in countries around the world about the question of immigration on the surface the debates about immigration seem to be about economics about the effect of immigration on jobs on wages on welfare benefits on standards of living but it seems to me that the reason the immigration debate generates such heat and passion and anger and anxiety is that this debate touches on deeper bigger questions than economics alone questions like what do we owe one another as citizens do we owe more to our fellow citizens than we owe to humanity as such should I as an American care more about the welfare of someone let's say in Texas whom I've never met then I should care about someone living in Mexico just about the across the border or not and then there's the question of patriotism which underlies much of this debate is patriotism of virtue or is it a kind of prejudice back in the 18th century jean-jacques Rousseau wrote powerfully into fence of patriotism and particularity he said it seems that the sentiment of humanity evaporates in weakens in being extended over the entire world and that we cannot be affected by the calamities in Tartary or in Japan the way we are by those of a European people Rousseau thought that we can't be affected by calamities half a world away but what happens when we can witness those calamities almost from the moment they happen what happens when we can discuss and debate the appropriate response to those calamities with people from around the world in a conversation like this when we can do that could it be that the line between members and strangers will begin to blur well it's hard to know this technology and the discussions it makes possible are really just at their infancy but I think it is fair to say that this discussion offers us a glimpse of what reasoned global public discourse might be and so to our participants from around the world to those listening on radio to those watching online I want to thank you for joining us for this the first episode of the global philosopher thank you very much you

Channel: BBC News

Views: 47,080

Keywords: philosophy, michael sandel, sandel, professor, national borders, border, borders, culture, lifestyle, history, bbc news, news, documentary, interview, documentaries, underground, philosopher, sandel philosophy, harvard, harvard business school, youtube, video, education, knowledge, ted, ted talk, ted talks, amazing video, debate, africa, europe, asia, refugee, migrants, migrant, refugees

Id: yJgEnHbLN-I

Length: 30min 17sec (1817 seconds)

Published: Sat Apr 16 2016

Reddit Comments

[u/Herculius]

What many people seem to be missing is the importance of human nature and the importance of societal continuity in human development.

The world in itself is largely chaotic. There is so much information in the world that humans have to sort in order to move themselves towards any worthy ideal. Part of the story is that people, and societies, need to have structure and limitations in order to grow and learn. The values of the community are very important. Even if the values of the community are not always right, they cannot be simply disregarded in some short amount of time.

Values can change, people can evolve, but you can't expect seamless changes in one day. If you don't acknowledge the importance of time and narrative of values, you inevitably will produce some chaotic state of affairs.

Modern leftists and humanitarians have made huge strides to end discrimination and acknowledge other values etc. Westerners like the woman from Germany are quick to realize past mistakes and abuses of cultural power... However.... if society opens it's arms completely, with its arms wide open and completely accepting....societies will change too fast, and they weaken to the point that we end up losing the moral progress that has been made in any of these areas.

[u/gg-shostakovich]

I think we must also ask ourselves if borders matters at all today, not only if borders should matter. Considering that we live in a very integrated, hyper connected, financialized global economy, I wouldn't be surprised if a notion like 'border' becomes irrelevant.