It’s getting kind of repetitive pointing out that conservative anti-immigration arguments make no sense and directly contradict other things they say they believe. But indulge me once more. This topic is worth returning to because few issues are as important as getting the most talented and productive people in the world to the countries where they can do the most good for humanity. All the supposed “costs” of immigration are either made up, or so insignificant that they are simply overwhelmed by the welcoming of a handful of uniquely capable individuals. Trump recently handing out six awards for contributions to science and technology, five of them to immigrants, is a reminder of what is at stake.
The idea that Asian immigrants work too hard has recently been fully endorsed by Chris Rufo. Helen Andrews has also made this argument. Yes, I know the boring point to make here is that conservatives supported objective standards of merit until five minutes ago. But let’s put that aside and think about why, even if the striver argument is true, it doesn’t come close to forming a rational case against immigration.
It’s true there is such a thing as being too ambitious for one’s own good. Education in particular is largely a negative-sum credentialing game, and it’s probably better if society as a whole invests less in schooling. If immigration increases but Harvard does not proportionally increase the number of students it admits, it becomes more difficult to get in. In some fields, like medicine, professional organizations restrict entry to drive wages up. These are pathologies in specific areas of the economy, and we should obviously fix them.