My friend Ike--the guy who lives out in the woods, where he can read philosophy and shoot target practice whenever he likes from his back porch--has an interesting approach to immigration.
On a recent visit I made to his cabin, Ike told me his idea: "I say shut the borders. Completely. Nobody else in."
His reason wasn't xenophobic or racist, but purely and practically environmental. And since its provocative and troubling, I thought I'd ask for help thinking about it.
"Americans have the largest per-person ecological footprint, by far," he said. "Every American we add, that's five less people in the world who can ever have an ecologically sustainable life. Americans kill people just by living. And I'm against killing people."
I don't know where he got his number, and he wasn't in a mood to give footnotes.
"So I say, shut the borders. Completely. Nobody else in. Everybody wants to come here and participate in our disgusting, fuel-guzzling, resource-profligate life style. They want to drive and shop and watch TV and burn through the planet faster than they can do at home. I say, make 'em stay where they are. It's the least we can do for the planet. My policy is actually kinder to less developed countries, because the more Americans there are, the greater the damage to the planet--most of it off in the less developed countries--and so the less able the planet will be to support human life in the future. If you love the downtrodden, underprivileged people of the world, the best thing you can do is tell them to stay where they are and not come here."
I can see how cornucopians--those who believe in the infinite possibility of technology to make nature unnecessary to us economically--would have an argument to make against Ike. They wouldn't accept his fundamental premisses--that the capacity of the planet to play host to economic activity is finite, and we've exceeded the limits already. The Cornucopian would say, since we can infinintely increase wealth, even on our fininte planet, then there's no reason not to share it by letting everyone in.
But the evidence from the planet suggests the cornucopians are wrong. If you've read my other diaries you know about the concept of natural capital, and how we derive non-market goods and services directly from nature--and about the laws of thermodynamics, that tell us that infinite growth in any material and thermodynamic process (like, say, economic growth) is impossible in a finite system.
So, among the people who are skeptical that the earth has an infinite capacity to play host to economic activity, it seems to me that Ike's argument ought to have some force. How would you answer him?