The undermining of non-white and third-world populations in the ethics of immigration

The purpose of this work is to demonstrate that the preferred ethical immigration criteria suggested by liberal political philosophers Joseph Carens and Lea Ypi are not culturally neutral, and are historically ignorant and problematic. Joseph Carens' arguments for his criteria - that fit and language competency are acceptable admissions criteria - suggest that these features are neutral with respect to ethnic and racial identities, despite these same criteria having been used to historically undermine oppressed and marginalized racial and ethnic identities. Lea Ypi's argument, that skill-based criterion is culturally neutral because it relies on the skills of an immigrant and not on their social identity, disregards the history behind the skilled vs. unskilled divide, one that was racially charged and motivated to preserve white privilege and power. Through my critiques of both Carens and Ypi, I hope to unveil that their criteria ignore the evolution that racial/ethnic prejudice and immigration have with one another. In order to find possible solutions and criteria void of this unawareness, non-ideal theory and frameworks should be considered and implemented into these attempts.