Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think even the most Pollyanna-ish perspective claims that there's a global meritocracy. The smashing success of merit-based immigrants in high-income countries is a pretty undeniable signal that we're nowhere near the point where the marginal legal immigrant is less "meritorious" than the pop avg. I'm personally willing to bite the whole bullet and am an open-borders advocate. But it's a mistake to think that…
>I'm personally willing to bite the whole bullet and am an open-borders advocate. But it's a mistake to think that supporters of border restrictions aren't aware that they're explicitly anti-meritocratic. I'm an immigrant to the US. I support tight border restrictions because the current status quo regarding the Mexican border, visa overstays, and emphasis on family reunification makes it harder for the US to have a…
But the vast majority of people accept the legitimacy of restricted immigration. IMO the line of moral revulsion they draw between your view and their own is largely illusory. Once you've accepted that you're selecting immigrants, it seems nonsensical to me that your selection criteria should consist of a) rigid and horrifyingly Kafkaesque processes for 99% of countries and b) an inconsistent drip of unselected migrants from an adjacent country (through a process that puts them at substantial physical risk).
Frankly, I'm a little contemptuous of people with this perspective. They don't seem to have thought through their belief that we should restrict the border, but do a shitty job of it in random ways.