Liberalism believes in moral egalitarianism – the doctrine that human beings deserve equal moral consideration. Thus race, ethnicity, sex, language or religion cannot be used to discriminate between people. Now, traditionally liberals applied this principle of non discrimination only within national boundaries. Some liberal thinkers believe that egalitarian guarantees should not be confined to national boundaries or to territorial states. They consider an individual’s nationality also an accident of birth like his/her race, gender, or social class. It cannot therefore be made a basis for differentiation in dispensing administrative justice. This leads to the vexing problem of the moral status of national boundaries.
Inmanycases,this is notjust an esoterictheoretical problem.It hasthefollowingconsequences.
¤ It undermines the legitimacy of national boundaries of nations.
¤ It obliteratesthe distinction between citizens and foreigners.
¤ It will confer rights on the hordes of illegal aliens or immigrants who move into and settle in a country.
USA is currently facing these questions in regard to illegal Latin American immigrants. Liberals represented by the Democratic Party are in favour of conferring citizenship on these immigrants. Republican Party which represents conservative opinion opposes this proposal, partly because the immigrants after acquiring citizenship may form a permanent support group of Democrats.
This is a highly sensitive issue in India. There is continuous and unchecked immigration from Bangladesh into Assam, West Bengal and North East. It is claimed that this infiltration has taken place with the connivance of some political parties. This infiltration has also led to an agitation from the Assamese people. This is one of the main reasons for the frequent violent eruptions in the north east. This infiltration is massive enough to undermine the political standing of the local peoples and their way of life. Our limited interest in the subject is from the point of view of ethical theory. We can onlytouch upon these practical issues, and interestedreaderscanstudythe matter further.
From a theoretical angle, this raises the question: can moral egalitarianism be confined to national boundaries? There are three reasons for restricting it to the citizens of the nation.
(A) Duties towards fellow nationals differ in kind from those owed to others because national community is the source of language and values used in making moral judgments.
(B) Distinct duties to one’s fellow nationals arise because it is necessary for well being and protection of the national community.
(C) Men find themselves located in a particular society, share a culture and are determined to livewithinit.This national or local communityhas to preserveitsdistinct identity.Thisgives it a right to close its borders against outsiders, even if those outsiders are needier than its members. Admission and exclusion are at the core of national independence. They constitute the meaning of self-determination. Otherwise, there would be no nations. Patriotism belongs to a class of loyalty-exhibiting virtues; other such virtues include - love of one’s own family and of relatives, friendship andloyalty to cherishedinstitutions.
Patriotism conflicts with universalism in morals. Many TV anchors and talkers they assemble sneer at patriotism and describe it as tribalism. We have given above the moral reasons which support patriotism. There is no need to teach patriotic virtues to common people. They are ingrained in them. We need to consider this question since many pseudo intellectuals try demoralize ordinary folks by dismissing their attachment to their nation, religion, language and culture as barbarian parochialism.
MacIntyre argues that a flourishing community of agents with shared moral norms and values is a necessary precondition of one’s continued existence as a moral agent; therefore, patriotism— understood as involving special obligations to maintain and defend one’s nation—is a precondition of morality. He mentions that the ends in terms of which morality is justified to human beings arises in the shared understandings of the community. No one can remain as a lone moral hero without any community of shared moral understanding. MacIntyre observes, “We are unlikely to flourish
as moral agents if deprived of a community of shared moral understandings. Hence, morality and patriotism cannot be meaningfully contrasted as distinct strands of normative thinking; patriotism is the precondition of moral functioning.” He adds that some parts of the national project must be treated as permanently exempt from critical examination. If a national community systematically disowns itstrue history or substitutes a fictitious historyfor it (for various reasons) or tries to replace national ties derived from shared history with bonds of reciprocal self-interest, it will disintegrate.