The 1700's and the 1800's were the high-water marks for open immigration, and the expansion of European colonial empires. Motivated, entrepreneurial people left Europe and to a lesser extent Asia in droves for the New World countries of the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand. As thinly populated (due to smallpox's effect on the native population) opened for settlement and trans-oceanic travel became routine the people came. The new worlds had little to offer other than land and opportunity. There were few objections because the migrations didn't cost much to the host countries. And they gained a source of cheap labor.
Colonialism was spurred by opportunities to import valued items, as well as, unfortunately, slave labor. People rationalized colonialism as improving the lot of natives. Christianity was to solve the problems of the world. In fact, it rationalized exploitation and racism. Conceding that, however, the living conditions of people who were not tribal chiefs or royalty was deplorable. When the colonial system went "bust" in the post WW II era, many, aided by air and fast ocean travel wanted to come. And the West had a high standard of living, as well as a welfare "safety net."
Pre-Congress of Vienna, and post 1914 life in Europe was a mess. What is now the "Third World" was always a mess but its people had no access to or knowledge of the West. Now, the U.S., Europe, Australia and Israel are beleaguered by the waves of people who want something better. However, by and large, they lack the education and/or work ethic needed to succeed in 21st Century society.
"Compassion" dictates throwing open the gates. Common sense dictates ensuring that the influx is manageable and that we get the best people. This, unfortunately, entails policies that most thinking people consider heartless. The tension between people who emphasize "heart" and those who emphasize "head" is enormous and divides people from their friends and colleagues.
Independence in the 1950's and 1960's has come with large amounts of aid. And private help. Think "We Are the World." And the "world" has nothing to show for it. Taxpayers in the more affluent countries cannot be expected to open their homes, hands and hearts endlessly. Perhaps the way to go is large-scale international aid, administered by the West. Sort of like a Peace Corp. on a large scale. We cannot shirk our moral duties to the world. However, for obvious reasons, in doing this we cannot respect the right of kleptocratic leaders to "self-determination."
Colonialism was spurred by opportunities to import valued items, as well as, unfortunately, slave labor. People rationalized colonialism as improving the lot of natives. Christianity was to solve the problems of the world. In fact, it rationalized exploitation and racism. Conceding that, however, the living conditions of people who were not tribal chiefs or royalty was deplorable. When the colonial system went "bust" in the post WW II era, many, aided by air and fast ocean travel wanted to come. And the West had a high standard of living, as well as a welfare "safety net."
Pre-Congress of Vienna, and post 1914 life in Europe was a mess. What is now the "Third World" was always a mess but its people had no access to or knowledge of the West. Now, the U.S., Europe, Australia and Israel are beleaguered by the waves of people who want something better. However, by and large, they lack the education and/or work ethic needed to succeed in 21st Century society.
"Compassion" dictates throwing open the gates. Common sense dictates ensuring that the influx is manageable and that we get the best people. This, unfortunately, entails policies that most thinking people consider heartless. The tension between people who emphasize "heart" and those who emphasize "head" is enormous and divides people from their friends and colleagues.
Independence in the 1950's and 1960's has come with large amounts of aid. And private help. Think "We Are the World." And the "world" has nothing to show for it. Taxpayers in the more affluent countries cannot be expected to open their homes, hands and hearts endlessly. Perhaps the way to go is large-scale international aid, administered by the West. Sort of like a Peace Corp. on a large scale. We cannot shirk our moral duties to the world. However, for obvious reasons, in doing this we cannot respect the right of kleptocratic leaders to "self-determination."
