Inclusive Membership as Fairness? A Rawlsian Argument for Provisional Immigrants

Esma Baycan-Herzog
{"title":"Inclusive Membership as Fairness? A Rawlsian Argument for Provisional Immigrants","authors":"Esma Baycan-Herzog","doi":"10.1163/24689300-20221058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nInfamously, Rawls assumed a democratic society to be “a complete and closed social system,” in that “entry into it is only by birth and exit from it is only by death.” Since the beginning of the present millennium, however, debates about the ethical issues related to immigration have been prominent. In this context, these methodological departure points seem long outdated, if not simply biased. This paper will rework Rawls’s theory of migration for application to the case of provisional immigrants by reworking its theoretical underpinnings. I will argue that once his assumptions are adjusted, Rawlsian notions of ‘stability’ in conjunction with his idea of a ‘society understood as a fair system of cooperation’ justify inclusive membership regimes. In other words, Rawlsian domestic justice requires inclusive membership regimes for provisional immigrants.","PeriodicalId":202424,"journal":{"name":"Danish Yearbook of Philosophy","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Danish Yearbook of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24689300-20221058","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Infamously, Rawls assumed a democratic society to be “a complete and closed social system,” in that “entry into it is only by birth and exit from it is only by death.” Since the beginning of the present millennium, however, debates about the ethical issues related to immigration have been prominent. In this context, these methodological departure points seem long outdated, if not simply biased. This paper will rework Rawls’s theory of migration for application to the case of provisional immigrants by reworking its theoretical underpinnings. I will argue that once his assumptions are adjusted, Rawlsian notions of ‘stability’ in conjunction with his idea of a ‘society understood as a fair system of cooperation’ justify inclusive membership regimes. In other words, Rawlsian domestic justice requires inclusive membership regimes for provisional immigrants.
包容性会员制度是否公平?临时移民的罗尔斯式论证
臭名昭著的是,罗尔斯认为民主社会是“一个完整而封闭的社会系统”,因为“只有出生才能进入它,只有死亡才能退出它”。然而,自本世纪初以来,有关移民的伦理问题的辩论一直很突出。在这种情况下,这些方法出发点似乎早已过时,如果不是完全有偏见的话。本文将通过对罗尔斯移民理论的理论基础进行重新梳理,使其适用于临时移民的案例。我认为,一旦他的假设被调整,罗尔斯的“稳定”概念与他的“社会被理解为一个公平的合作体系”的想法相结合,证明了包容性成员制度的合理性。换句话说,罗尔斯式的国内正义要求临时移民的包容性成员制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信