Post
by Dawie » Sun Jan 28, 2007 12:37 pm
The reality is that discrimination (whether it be by race, class, wealth, nationality or otherwise) is alive and well today, despite human rights charters, etc. Immigration control, by it's very nature, is discriminatory. If discrimination did not exist, there would be no need for immigration control.
What I always find interesting is the double standards that a lot of people live their lives by. For example, I'm sure most forward-thinking people in the UK would be disgusted if someone was denied a job because they were black, or because they were female, or because they were overweight. And yet, every day, people are regularly denied entry into the UK because of that most arbitrary of markers....their nationality. Yet everyone seems to think that it is perfectly OK to discriminate based on nationality. How fair is that? Entire moral judgements are made of people based on their nationality.
It's like they say:
"Ok, you're from the USA, so you don't need a visa, and you're from India, so obviously we can't trust you, so sorry, we'll need a DNA sample, fingerprints, urine sample, biometrics and full-cavity search before we'll even think of granting you a visa."
What makes someone from the USA more trustworthy than someone from India? The only way to make immigration rules fair is to apply the same rules to ALL nationalities. Either everyone needs a visa or everyone does not. But to make some nationalities require one and some others not require one is just plain discriminatory and unfair.
In a few years time we'll look back on immigration control like we look back on American prohibition in the thirties - futile and counter-productive.