I think that one of the problems is that the parameters used in analyzing e.g. visa requests, among other things, are
not clearly laid out.
To some extent, we are reduced to anecdote, because an opaque and sometimes seemingly capricious (if not malicious) system -- or set of sometimes cooperating, sometimes competing systems -- leaves us no choice.
There also appears to be no effective and consistent gradation in risk management. No ability to elicit further investigation and potential resolution of open questions -- whether they are legitimate or the result of an inept initial evaluation.
A prime example of this, not with respect to visas but with respect to ongoing travel, with plans already made and tickets already purchased, is the "no-fly list" and other apparent, more obscure and hidden lists and qualifications having similar effects upon travel.
Are you on it? We can't tell you. Why are you on it? We can't tell you. I (general "I") have a mountain of evidence I can present demonstrating that I'm not a threat. There's no effective appeal process (never mind any "ostensible" appeal process; much reporting has demonstrated such to apparently be entirely non-functional). I'm willing to submit to search to demonstrate that I am not nor am carrying any immediate threat. Not an option.
That and why you are on the list is a secret. Options to mitigate a perceived risk and allow travel are not an option.
Hardly hallmarks of an "open" society.
I mention the "no-fly list" also in good part because it applies also to U.S. citizens. Such cases are not a matter of a foreign national soliciting the U.S. for a... "privilege". They reflect a government opaquely and apparently extra-judicially limiting free association (via travel).
The U.S. is still the envy of much of the world, and not without some good reasons. And the majority of trips both by foreign nationals and by U.S. citizens take place without undo circumstance. But the trend in travel restrictions worries me, for one. And, as an ostensibly self-governing citizenry, how are we to effectively govern as such policies increasingly cut us off from controversial parts of the world we might do well to actually pay more attention to? Such governance includes foreign policy. Also, foreign examples can serve as useful lessons in guiding our own domestic policy -- if such examples are though of as "bad", then as examples of things to learn from and hopefully avoid.
token, I know you as an open-minded, insightful, and "fair" participant, here, and I don't mean my response to come across as overly "argumentative" or upset. Rather, I take your point, but present my own not so much as a counter-point but as an adjunct that I think also needs to be considered, and so I'm mentioning it in this response.