This section briefly explores Spheres of Justice (1983), particularly the concept of membership. The topic of justice is important to Walzer (1983). ‘His goal is to show that the simple equality where every person has the same amount of goods, may not be the best paradigm for equality’ because this process becomes a constant redistributing of wealth (Townsley, 2004, 1). Equality ‘is an ideal ripe for betrayal’ (Walzer, 1983, xi). It is betrayed from the very moment the first meeting is organised when power and positions are distributed. Someone is elected chairperson and whoever can articulate more eloquently frequently takes over; in this sense equality does not exist (Walzer, 1983). Human beings do recognise that people are different because of the various talents, skills, wisdoms and grace that distinguish each person from another. Nevertheless, in its most basic form, equality inherently means that everyone is the same. In reality, what generally occurs is that one group of people will dominate another group: ‘it’s what the population with power do to those without it’ (Walzer, 1983, xiii). Social goods such as birth, blood, wealth, state power or education are always a source of domination (Walzer, 1983) and therefore need to be controlled in order not to control other human beings. No social good should be used as a tool to dominate (Walzer, 1983) but arguably it is:
The primary good that we distribute to one another is membership in some human community. And what we do with regard to membership structures all our other distributive choices: it determines with whom we make those choices, from whom we require obedience and collect taxes, to whom we allocate goods and services...men and women
89 without membership anywhere are stateless persons...non-members are
vulnerable and unprotected (Walzer, 1983, 31).
Individuals who are classified as non-members do not qualify for welfare and security provision, and public services such as health care for example, are not necessarily available to non-members. The reality, according to Walzer is that ‘statelessness is a condition of infinite danger’ (Walzer, 1983, 32). A person does not necessarily have to be stateless to be a non-member of society; this can occur in a poor or very rich country where it is densely crowded or extremely sparse and it can also occur as a ‘subject of an authoritarian regime or the citizen of a democracy’ (Walzer, 1983, 32). Human beings, by their very nature, tend to migrate to better environments. We may choose the country that we wish to migrate to, but at the same time, the country more often than not may not choose us. Walzer’s (1983) theory shows us that the stranger (not our enemies) may ‘be entitled to our hospitality, assistance, and good will’ (Walzer, 1983, 33) because the act of showing hospitality to the stranger does not require continuous or further care. This approach is the Good Samaritan approach (Townsley, 2004). It is not uncommon for people to resent the stranger, so our very neighbourhoods can become little states which in turn keep non-members out.
Neighbourhoods might maintain some cohesive culture for a generation or two on a voluntary basis, but people would move in, people would move out; soon the cohesive would be gone...the distinctiveness of cultures and groups depends upon closure and, without it, cannot be conceived as a stable feature of human life
(Walzer, 1983, 39).
In other words, if a culture is to remain distinct, it must remain closed to outsiders. Therefore there has to be some level of political or State organisation to develop an admissions policy to regulate inward migration. The ‘restraint of entry serves to defend the liberty and welfare, the politics and culture of a group of people committed to one another and to their common life’ (Walzer, 1983, 39). No-one on the outside of a club has a right to be a member of that club. The ‘club’ is a symbolic figure but it provides a sense of belonging. Only members of the club can choose who will be a member. Walzer (1983) speaks about the ‘kinship principle’, where by association of relationship, we allow distant relatives into the family circle. This principle also
90 includes another principle of association, that of belonging to one culture. An example of this principle occurred during the Second World War, when children normally residing in London were taken into homes in the English countryside. Neither the adult nor the child was related but the concept of community connections was there. Men and women have family commitments which should not be ignored. As stated, countries can be ‘clubs’ or ‘families’, but countries are also territorial states. The actual territory is real and its symbolic meaning is also real between the bond of the land and its people. It is not uncommon that many residents of a ‘particular country won’t be allowed full membership (citizenship) because of their nationality’ (Walzer, 1983, 43). In other words, the citizens of the host country do not welcome the newcomers as citizens.
There is a very strong link between the land and the people belonging to that land; this ‘is a crucial feature of national identity’ (Walzer, 1983, 44). A country is a space or a territory within a border whose political leaders understand the importance of education and welfare provision and how it can be distributed within that space. This is the reason why borders can be bitterly disputed. The ‘process of “liberation”...the theory of justice must allow for the territorial state, specifying the rights of its inhabitants and recognising the collective right of admission and refusal’ (Walzer, 1983, 44). The ‘territory is a social good in a double sense’ because ‘it is living space, earth and water, mineral resources and potential wealth...it is a protected living space, with borders and police’ (Walzer, 1983, 44-45). Refugees are the only group of people looking for membership because their individual politics or religion is not tolerated in their country of origin or they are victims of persecution (Walzer 1983). However, as long as the numbers of refugees remain small, refugees are accepted, but once the numbers begin to increase, the criteria become restricted; the host country will seek similar characteristics of the host nation:
The members of a political community have a collective right to shape the resident population-a right subject always to the double control that I have described: the meaning of membership to the current members and the principle of mutual aid
91 Territorial admission is a serious matter because when a person resides in the country, the right of access to citizenship arises yet at the same time migrants are regarded as ultimately necessary because they ‘free the citizens from hard and unpleasant work’ (Walzer, 1983, 52). It is common in western economies for migrants to fulfil jobs that are dirty, dangerous and degrading. Symbolically, the State is ‘like a family with live- in servants’ (Walzer, 1983, 52). In this sense, the servants are ‘assimilated’ into the State as guest workers. These workers are usually sourced from poorer countries whose citizens find the jobs less undesirable. Western governments recruit these workers under strict regulations. Among other regulations, they need a visa to work in the country and when the job ends, the guest worker leaves. A guest worker is a temporary worker, not an immigrant seeking a new home and citizenship. They are discouraged from bringing family members with them. They have no political rights. This process of denial is sometimes official and sometimes done by the underlying threat of deportation.
When workers are required on a long term basis, the regulations may become more relaxed, family reunification may be permitted and they may have access to State services but their position always remains precarious. Residency is strongly tied to employment, and the migrant must support themselves and their family at all times; otherwise they can be deported. Guest workers traditionally work in poorly paid employment, send their wages back home and remain in this temporary status. This is beneficial to the host country, the guest worker and the ‘membership members’. Economically, the work is done while politically the ‘family’ or the ‘club’ remains intact. Politically, the guest worker is tightly constrained, exploited and oppressed; basically they are disenfranchised. The State is seen as all powerful. Goldberg (2002) suggests that it is this very power that gives people permission to stay in the State or not (Goldberg, 2001). Walzer (1983) classifies guest workers as ‘outcasts in a society that has no caste norms’ (Walzer, 1983, 59). These outcasts look like ordinary members of the State but are deemed outcasts as they are barred from citizenship. This is the only way to get dirty, dangerous and degrading (3D) jobs done. Undeniably, the ‘rule of citizens over non-citizens, of members over strangers, is probably the most common form of tyranny in human history’ (Walzer, 1983, 62). It is also the first form of abuse and it leads to a number of other abuses, such as the lack of political rights. Only those qualified as members have membership rights. Full membership of a State
92 allows the individual access to the social goods and security services of that state, so full membership means that a person is an insider not an outsider.
In summary, Walzer’s (1983) concept of equality means everyone is equal, but in practice, it is almost impossible to create the conditions of equality. Migrants are needed to do the 3D jobs and once this work is completed, the migrant will leave. Residency is strongly tied to employment; the migrant must be economically viable, otherwise s/he is deported. Guest worker status is temporary and guest workers are deemed outcasts as they are barred from citizenship. The citizens of the host country do not welcome the new citizens; they are regarded as non-members and therefore stateless which is: ‘a condition of infinite danger’ (Walzer, 1983, 32). These are the living conditions and experiences of many ethnic minority groups in Ireland. Numerous groups are employed in low-paid low-skilled employment (3D jobs). Their residency status is temporary and is very dependent on employment. There are too many migrants who live in fear of deportation, with no sense of belonging on a daily basis. Every aspect of their lives is controlled. Yet as one politician pointed out, we invite them here, they contribute to the tax system but we restrict them from the companionship of their spouse or family: this ‘is a proposition that flies in the face of civilised norms in Western society’ (Houses of Oireachtas Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2008, 15 May 2008).