Podcast Summary
Geopolitical implications of open borders: Open borders debate overlooks potential problems for small countries, ethnic minorities, and territories facing expansionist states, and assumes a static political situation, ignoring significant alterations to political institutions
The open borders debate, as often presented by libertarians, tends to overlook geopolitical issues and focuses primarily on the economic benefits for developed countries. This narrow perspective ignores potential problems for small countries, ethnic minorities, and territories facing expansionist states. Open borders advocates also assume a static political situation, but large-scale migration significantly alters political institutions. The lack of consideration for these factors suggests a limited understanding of open borders beyond the context of wealthy nations.
Open borders and smaller countries: Open borders can lead to demographic shifts, loss of majority status, and potential loss of rights and prerogatives for smaller countries, particularly in regions with religious, ethnic, and language divisions.
The effects of open borders are not politically neutral, especially for smaller countries next to larger ones. Demographic shifts due to migration can lead to a loss of majority status, which in turn can result in a loss of rights and prerogatives, including self-rule and property protections. This is particularly significant in regions with pronounced religious, ethnic, and language divisions, such as Europe, Asia, and Africa. The challenges faced by small countries in this regard are vastly different from those faced by wealthy countries with large native-born populations and no direct borders with large, lower-income countries. These factors must be considered when discussing the implications of open borders.
Geopolitical risks of open borders: Open borders between countries with vastly different economic and political situations can lead to significant geopolitical risks and potential instability, as shown in the example of Latvia and Russia.
Open borders between countries with vastly different economic and political situations can lead to significant geopolitical risks and potential instability. Using the example of Latvia and Russia, if Latvia were to implement open borders, a large influx of Russians could change the demographic balance, potentially leading to political instability and even annexation. While the economic benefits of an open border are debatable, the political consequences could outweigh them, especially in the context of a long-standing history of hostility between the two nations. This example underscores the importance of considering the potential geopolitical implications of open borders, and the need for careful consideration and planning when implementing such policies.
Demographic tensions between neighbors: Wealthier countries becoming neighbors to less prosperous ones can face complex demographic issues, potentially leading to threats to property rights and human rights, even in low-mid income countries. Careful consideration of historical, cultural, and geopolitical contexts is necessary before opening borders.
The demographic situation of a country becoming a wealthier neighbor to its less prosperous neighbor can lead to complex and potentially contentious issues. This can result in the wealthier country facing the risk of becoming an ethnic or demographic minority within its own borders, potentially leading to threats to property rights and human rights. This is not limited to high-income countries, as even low-mid income countries like Botswana can face similar challenges. The potential consequences are further complicated when there are growing levels of international conflict between the two countries. For instance, had Ukraine adopted open borders with Russia before the Russo-Ukraine War, the Russian regime could have used migration to strengthen its control in the region. Ultimately, the decision to open borders should be carefully weighed against the potential risks and benefits, taking into account the specific historical, cultural, and geopolitical contexts of the involved countries.
Open borders and geopolitical influence: Open borders could potentially be used as a strategic tool for expanding geopolitical influence, but could also lead to backdoor colonization
Open borders could potentially be used as a strategic tool for influencing international borders and expanding geopolitical influence. This can be seen in the historical context of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, where ethnic Russians living near the border could have gradually shifted the region towards Russian control through migration. Similarly, in the context of China and Vietnam, an open border could potentially benefit China in renegotiating the location of the border. However, this strategy could also lead to backdoor colonization, where smaller countries are influenced or even taken over by larger neighbors through migration. It's important to consider these potential implications when considering open border policies.
Demographic changes in democratic countries: Demographic changes in democratic countries due to open borders can lead to political changes and outpace the assimilation ability of the country
Open borders can lead to significant demographic and political changes in smaller, democratic countries, potentially outpacing their ability to assimilate large numbers of new residents. This issue is not new, as economist Ludwig von Mises recognized a century ago when discussing the potential influx of immigrants from Europe. While some argue that only an absurdly large number of migrants would justify border control, the reality is that for many countries, even smaller numbers could bring about drastic changes. This is particularly relevant for democratic countries in close proximity to more populous nations. The borders around Indian reservations and colonies, as well as the Algerian border under French rule, offer examples of demographic imbalances that don't matter as much in non-democratic contexts due to the Metropole's power to prop up minority populations. However, in democratic countries, demographic changes can lead to political changes implemented via the ballot box, potentially outpacing a country's ability to assimilate new residents.
Political realities of open borders: Economically, open borders are beneficial but politically, the reality can be different due to demographic changes and fear of losing control, as seen in Australia.
While economically, open borders are preferable according to economist Ludwig von Mises, politically, the reality can be different. Mises noted that in the 20th century, changes in demographics and technology facilitated rapid immigration, which could fundamentally change the liberal nature of Western regimes. He used the example of Australia, where fear of being outnumbered and losing control of their own country was a major concern. Despite his belief in the economic benefits of open borders, Mises acknowledged that political realities often intervene, leading to new political realities that can be used against the very people who intended to improve economic growth and property rights through open migration. Ultimately, Mises concluded that while open borders are economically sound, the political realities must also be considered.