The Needy Immigrant, Nationalism, Globalism, and the Universal Destination of Goods

The Josias

The current debates on immigration between liberal globalists on the one hand and populist nationalists on the other raise fundamental questions about the nature of political community and solidarity. Neither side offers satisfactory answers to these questions. Immigration naturally raises such fundamental questions, since the extent to which new members are admitted to a community varies widely depending on how that community understands and sustains its own internal unity. Thus a nomadic tribe, living in easily breachable tents, and depending on close bonds of trust will approach the integration of strangers differently than a city-state with stone houses, locking doors, speculative philosophy, and law courts.

View original post 1,946 more words

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “The Needy Immigrant, Nationalism, Globalism, and the Universal Destination of Goods

  1. “The nationalists, on the other hand, favor protectionist immigration policies, often with callous disregard for the needs of refugees and migrants.”

    This is the type of commentary that is next to worthless because it proves the writer is clueless.

    Not that I fault you, when virtually every word written by Churchmen never takes seriously the duty men have towards their own, but instead push men to unnaturally sacrifice their own for the good of strangers.

    Like

    • “virtually every word written by Churchmen never takes seriously the duty men have towards their own, but instead push men to unnaturally sacrifice their own for the good of strangers.”

      This type of comment betrays the profound ignorance of the commenter on the subject of the article which he is pontificating on. Fallen nature places worship of the identical (that is really self worship) over the genuine good, whereas that which is truly the higher and truer Good of the Foreigner cannot also be anything save the higher and truer Good of one’s Countrymen and Family as well. It this that Fallen nature forgets and of this which the Churchmen have consistently reminded us.

      Like


  2. T.H.R.,

    I probably should not have written a reply to Fr. Edmund’s false and defamatory characterization of those who favor protectionist immigration policy. I usually ignore gross ignorance of the kind displayed by Fr. Edmund, but unfortunately, once written I was unable to delete it.

    As for my comment concerning Churhmen, I stand by my assessment. They have the same lack of seriousness for the integrity of society at large as they have for the integrity of marriage. With the separation and annulment scandal proving exactly how serious they take the marriage vow and the duties of marriage.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s