Debating Migration

Includes statistical tables and graphs.

Do states have the right to prevent potential immigrants from crossing their borders, or should people have the freedom to migrate and settle wherever they wish? Christopher Heath Wellman and Phillip Cole develop and defend opposing answers to this timely and important question. Appealing to the right to freedom of association, Wellman contends that legitimate states have broad discretion to exclude potential immigrants, even those who desperately seek to enter. Against this, Cole argues that the commitment to the moral equality of all human beings - which legitimate states can be expected to hold - means national borders must be open: equal respect requires equal access, both to territory and membership; and that the idea of open borders is less radical than it seems when we consider how many territorial and community boundaries have this open nature. In addition to engaging with each other's arguments, Wellman and Cole address a range of central questions and prominent positions on this topic. The authors therefore provide a critical overview of the major contributions to the ethics of migration, as well as developing original, provocative positions of their own.

Forced Migration: Current Issues and Debates provides a critical engagement with and analysis of contemporary issues in the field using inter-disciplinary perspectives, through different geographical case studies and by employing varying methodologies. The combination of authors reviewing both the key research and scholarship and offering insights from their own research ensures a comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of the current issues in forced migration. The book is structured around three main current themes: the reconfiguration of borders including virtual borders, the expansion of prolonged exile, and changes in protection and access to rights. The first chapters in the collection provide both context and a theoretical overview by situating current debates and issues in their historical context including the evolution of field and the impact of the colonial and post-colonial world order on forced migration and forced displacement. These are followed by chapters framed around substantive issues including deportation and forced return; protracted displacements; securitising the Mediterranean and cross-border migration practices; refugees in global cities; forced migrants in the digital age; and second-generation identity and transnational practices. Forced Migration offers an original contribution to a growing field of study, connecting theoretical ideas and empirical research with policy, practice and the lived experiences of forced migrants. The volume provides a solid foundation, for students, academics and policy makers, of the main questions being asked in contemporary debates in forced migration.

A well balanced, critical analysis of UK migration policies, in a European context, from entry controls through to integration and citizenship of interest to academics and policy makers alike.

This issues-based reference work (available in both print and electronic formats) shines a spotlight on immigration policy in the United States. The U.S. is a nation of immigrants. Yet while the lofty words enshrined with the Statue of Liberty stand as a source of national pride, the rhetoric and politics surrounding immigration policy all-too-often have proven far less lofty. In reality, the apparently open invitation of Lady Liberty seldom has been without restriction. Throughout our history, impassioned debates about the appropriate scope and nature of such restriction have emerged and mushroomed, among politicians, among scholars of public policy, among the general public. In light of the need to keep students, researchers, and other interested readers informed and up-to-date on status of U.S. immigration policy, this volume uses introductory essays followed by point/counterpoint articles to explore prominent and perennially important debates, providing readers with views on multiple sides of this complex issue. While there are some brief works looking at debates on immigration, as well as some general A-to-Z encyclopedias, we offer more in-depth coverage of a much wider range of themes and issues, thus providing the only fully comprehensive point/counterpoint handbook tackling the issues that political science, history, and sociology majors are asked to explore and to write about as students and that they will grapple with later as policy makers and citizens. Features & Benefits: The volume is divided into three sections, each with its own Section Editor: Labor & Economic Debates (Judith Gans), Social & Cultural Debates (Judith Gans), and Political & Legal Debates (Daniel Tichenor). Sections open with a Preface by the Section Editor to introduce the broad theme at hand and provide historical underpinnings. Each section holds 12 chapters addressing varied aspects of the broad theme of the section. Chapters open with an objective, lead-in piece (or "headnote") followed by a point article and a counterpoint article. All pieces (headnote, point article, counterpoint article) are signed. For each chapter, students are referred to further readings, data sources, and other resources as a jumping-off spot for further research and more in-depth exploration. Finally, volume concludes with a comprehensive index, and the electronic version includes search-and-browse features, as well as the ability to link to further readings cited within chapters should they be available to the library in electronic format.

This concise, pointed contribution to the ongoing debate in Europe on the controversial phenomena of migration will appeal to the general reader, represent a significant contribution to the scholarly debate, and be an essential teaching and discussion tool. A brief introduction from the editor, setting the contours of the political debate on migration today in Europe, prepares the reader for the book’s debate. This is followed by two very powerful and contrasting statements for and against migration to Europe, and a response from each contributor to the other. The pro-immigration chapter is written by Philippe Fargues, one of our most eminent migration scholars, whilst the anti-immigration chapter written by Anatol Lieven, a renowned expert on nationalism. The authors engage directly with the other's position, deepening the debate and searching for common ground, and suggesting solutions. This text will be of key interest to readers, scholars, and students of international migration, migration and development, European politics, political theory, and more broadly to public policy and international relations.

Debating Migration as a Public Problem: National Publics and Transnational Fields is the first book to examine the symbolic construction of intra-EU labor migration in the public sphere of the sending state, taking Romania as a case study.

This book offers a broad interdisciplinary approach to the changes in the U.S. immigration debate before and after 9/11. A nation’s reaction to foreigners has as much to do with sociology as it does with political science, economics and psychology. Without drawing on this knowledge, our understanding of the immigration debate remains mundane, partial, and imperfect. Therefore, our story accounts for multiple factors, including culture and politics, power, organizations, social psychological processes, and political change. Examining this relationship in the contemporary context requires a lengthy voyage across academic disciplines, a synthesis of seemingly contradictory assumptions, and a grasp of research traditions so vast and confusing that an accurate rendering may seem implausible. And yet, to tell the story of the immigration debate in the age of terrorism, polarization, and Trump in any other way is to tell it in part. The immigration debate in the United States has always been about openness. Two questions in particular—how open should the door be and what type of immigrant should walk through it—have characterized policy disputes for well over a century. In the current debate, expansionists want to see more legal immigrants in the U.S. and greater tolerance, if not respect, for immigrants. Restrictionists favor lower levels of immigration, stronger borders, and tighter law enforcement measures to stop the stream of ‘illegal’ migration and alleged crime. The aim of this book is to describe how these opposing views materialized in the news media, political rhetoric, and, ultimately, in policy. Much of our argument rests on the idea that history matters, that the dominant narrative about immigration is in constant flux, and that the ‘winner’ of the immigration debate is determined by a vector of contextual elements: the joint impact of current events, enduring traditions, and political-economic forces. Our approach to the immigration debate avoids deterministic claims and grand-scale projections. Although we argue with conviction that a climate of fear played an important role in shaping the debate, the fear itself and its effects on social attitudes and public policy were neither inevitable nor necessarily long lasting.

In this text, two historians offer competing interpretations of the past, present, and future of American immigration policy and American attitudes towards immigration. Through essays and supporting primary documents, the authors provide recommendations for future policies and legal remedies.

This book is a response to the binary thinking and misuse of history that characterize contemporary immigration debates. Subverting the traditional injunction directed at migrants to ‘go back to where they came from’, it highlights the importance of the past to contemporary discussions around migration. It argues that historians have a significant contribution to make in this respect and shows how this can be done with chapters from scholars in, Asia, Europe, Australasia and North America. Through their work on global, transnational and national histories of migration, an alternative view emerges – one that complicates our understanding of 21st-century migration and reasserts movement as a central dimension of the human condition. History, Historians and the Immigration Debate makes the case for historians to assert themselves more confidently as expert commentators, offering a reflection on how we write migration history today and the forms it might take in the future.