Insiders and Outsiders
	Peter Singer
	Introduction to Philosophy
	Professor Doug Olena
The Shelter
	346, 347 Population 10,000
	Bleeding hearts want to let in another 10,000
	Moderates want to let in 500
	Others wish to let no one in who did not invest in the shelter.
The Real World
	348 Everyone has a right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. Article 14 of the 1948 United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
	³Well founded fear of persecutionŠ unable to find obtain protection in his own government.
	Distinction between genuine refugees and economic refugees.
The Real World
	348 The difficulty of achieving either voluntary repatriation or local settlement leaves resettlement in a more remote country as the only remaining option.
	349 Resettlement is the only solution for those who cannot return to their own countries in the foreseeable future and are only welcome temporarily in the country to which they have fled; in other words for those who have nowhere to go.
The Ex Gratia Approach
	349 A widely held attitude is that we are under no moral or legal obligation to accept any refugees at all.
	Michael Walzer asks in ³Spheres of Justice² how we constitute the community within which distribution [of justicewith respect to refugees] takes place.
The Ex Gratia Approach
	350 Do countries have the right to close their borders to potential immigrants? 
	His answer is that they do, because without such closure, or at least the power to close borders if desired, distinct communities cannot exist.
	Two metaphors that are used to describe how insiders treat outsiders: the club and the family.
The Ex Gratia Approach
	350 Clubs are examples of the Ex Gratia approach: ³Individuals may be able to give good reason why they should be selected, but no one on the outside has a right to be inside.²
	Families on the other hand are morally bound to open the doors of their country only to those recognized as national or ethnic ³relatives.²
The Ex Gratia Approach
	350 Although not accepting any general obligation on affluent nations to admit refugees, Walzer does uphold the popular principle of asylum.
	351 But no matter how many refugees we let in the problem still remains.
	The right of asylum is usually respected, as long as the numbers are relatively small.
Fallacy of the Current Approach
	351 The current orthodoxy rests on vague and usually unargued assumptions about the communityıs right to determine its membership.
	A consequentialist would hold, instead, that immigration policy should be based squarely on the interests of all those affected, those of the community and those of the refugees.
Fallacy of the Current Approach
	352 We should not assume that residents of the recipient nation will be affected for the worse: the economy may receive a boost from a substantial intake of refuges, and many residents may find business opportunities in providing for their needs.
	Consequences also arise from not taking significant numbers of refugees.
Fallacy of the Current Approach
	352 Economic stability and world peace depend on international cooperation based on some measure of respect and trust, but the resource-rich and not over-populated  countries of the world cannot expect to win the respect or trust of the poorest and most crowded countries if they leave them to cope with most of the refugee problem as best they can.
Fallacy of the Current Approach
	353-354 The question of how many refugees can be let into a country has to be determined at its limits by the ability of the land to safely absorb the refugees with out deterioration of the ecosystem and eventual economic collapse. 
	What are the definite consequences of a doubled refugee intake, in terms of having a significant impact on the interests of others. Would this increase the incidence of racist feeling in the community? How about the environmental impact?
Shelters and Refugees
	355 How would you have voted, in the referendum conducted in FairhavenŠ? I think most people would have been prepared to sacrifice not just a quarter, but all of the tennis courts to the greater need of those outside. Yet then it is difficult to see how you can disagree with the conclusion that affluent nations should be taking far, far more refugees than they are taking today.