[CRL] The Immigration Reform (Quality over Quantity) Bill

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

The claims of corruption and discrimination only make sense if you assume the absolute worst motives of the official, which, while I agree doing so would be appropriate if we were determining policy for another country, just doesn't seem necessary in today's Talossa.

No -- exactly the opposite is true.  In Talossa, there is very little chance that anyone will ever have the time and interest to scrutinize the records of dozens or hundreds of minor decisions about immigration.  We didn't even keep records on immigration numbers until a year ago!  There's virtually no journalism, there's only about seven or eight warm bodies who might even care, and the stakes are quite low in terms of anyone's real life.

And we're not even talking about open corruption, although that's the obvious objection to a secret immigration tribunal.

We're talking about the very human tendency to let the right-thinking essay slide a little more than the wrong-thinking essay.  If I get two essays from two applicants in poor English, but one of them vibes with me more?  Well, I will very obviously tend to judge that one as better.  That's not villainous, mustache-twirling corruption.  But it is corrupt, since it will tend to favor the person who thinks like the secret immigration judge.

I mean... yes, it's possible someone will tie a victim to the railroad tracks and then start trashing essays that speak fondly of capitalism or whatever, but that seems much less likely than the secret immigration gatekeeper just carelessly favouring those who strike them as the "right" sort of person.

Also, in the imagined "worst case scenario" of immigration Minister, there would be nothing stopping them from secretly throwing out applications under current law.

It's illegal to run people over with your car, but that's not an argument for painting over the crosswalks.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

I mean, it may well be that "the Government changed Immigration laws so it could exclude perfectly good citizens for reasons of corruption" might motivate a big voting bloc at the next election. Alternatively, we could be about to see a golden age where every new citizen is an informed and active one, and the voters would love that.

But all this is entirely hypothetical because right now there hasn't been an immigration application in almost two months, which is unfortunate but not something this bill is meant to deal with. Other government action will deal with that, schi Allà en volt.

In the Republic of Talossa, it was much harder to immigrate.  Indeed, this bill replicates a whole lot of those strictures.  And you yourself said that this substantially lowered the immigration rate, noting that "trade-offs must be made."

I think that probably it's a little early to worry, but if we're concerned immigration rate is dropping again, then is it the time to start trading it off for having a higher percentage of citizens who can write decent essays?

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

Referring to a very basic screening as a "secret tribunal" is one of those things that, while not conclusively false or dishonest (depending on definitions), is not, as the kids say, keeping it 💯.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

Referring to a very basic screening as a "secret tribunal" is one of those things that, while not conclusively false or dishonest (depending on definitions), is not, as the kids say, keeping it 💯.

The lesson has been learned in Talossan politics that rhetorical hyperinflation, and picking a catchphrase and running with it (Christopher Rufo-style) is a good way to win arguments, i.e. to get your opposition to give up with a sore head. Let's compare this to the similar rhetorical move applied to 54RZ4:

We're talking about the very human tendency to let a friendly applicant provide less proof of their identity than a grouchy applicant. If I get two social media accounts from two applicants, but I like the photos on one of them more?  Well, I will very obviously tend to judge that one more credible. That's not villainous, mustache-twirling corruption.  But it is corrupt, since it will tend to favor the person who thinks like the secret identity-confirmation tribunal.

The only way to go from this decision is to remove all Immigration Minister discretion at all, and allow prospectives to simply post their applications themselves, which would at least be consistent.

I remember when someone was saying that a particular decision of the CpI now meant that all cases would now be determined by lobbying the Judge in private. Didn't happen, but it was an exciting scenario to discuss.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Referring to a very basic screening as a "secret tribunal" is one of those things that, while not conclusively false or dishonest (depending on definitions), is not, as the kids say, keeping it 💯.

I don't know what a "very basic screening" might be, since the bill says that the secret judgment happens on the basis of whether the applicant has "insufficient understanding of or interest in Talossa" for the first check, and "sufficient understanding of Talossan life and culture for full participation" for the second check.

You might be under the impression that these are objective, clear-cut criteria.  But they are not.

I know you guys are going to pass this bill either way, but at the very minimum I can do my best to alert you to the fact that this is (a) not going to achieve the claimed goals, (b) probably bad on net for the country, and (c) a huge political liability because it looks really bad when the Government decides to institute secret gatekeeping on all applications.

I would much prefer you snatch away this campaign platform, crushing it to slivers before my very eyes, and foiling my dastardly attempt to sucker you into passing this bill.  Draft some clear and objective criteria for the secret immigration judge, and take the wind out of my sails!  Decide on an open process instead, and INSERT METAPHOR HERE!

Yes, it will be very easy to attack this Government for creating a new secret process where a Government official decides if a prospective immigrant "understands" the country enough.  I am telling you right now, before the bill is passed, that this is an obvious criticism since the plan sounds really bad.  Please defeat my sinister campaigning plan by not doing the obviously bad-sounding thing!

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Let's compare this to the similar rhetorical move applied to 54RZ4:

We're talking about the very human tendency to let a friendly applicant provide less proof of their identity than a grouchy applicant. If I get two social media accounts from two applicants, but I like the photos on one of them more?  Well, I will very obviously tend to judge that one more credible. That's not villainous, mustache-twirling corruption.  But it is corrupt, since it will tend to favor the person who thinks like the secret identity-confirmation tribunal.

The only way to go from this decision is to remove all Immigration Minister discretion at all, and allow prospectives to simply post their applications themselves, which would at least be consistent.

I'm not sure it's equally hard to stay objective about proof of someone's physical reality and the contents of an essay they wrote.  I mean, do you not understand how I could be concerned here?  Not just disagree, but you earnestly don't see what I'm talking about, and think these two judgment calls are equivalent?  If so, that might be an error of communication... maybe I have failed to write clearly about my concerns here.

But yes, there are a lot of other choices that could be taken to address the stated concerns here.  I already presented one: if we want the MinImm to judge who is a "quality" applicant to make them stand out, then why not just do that publicly and openly?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I'm not sure it's equally hard to stay objective about proof of someone's physical reality

Yeah, the thing is, unless you've got the investigative resources of a macronational police force, it is impossible to be 100% sure that Joe Schmoe from Bupkis, Alaska in the immigrant queue is who they say they are. I mean, they can provide social media accounts, etc., but it would be trivially easy for a determined crook falsify these (as I say, Lord Whatsisface fooled my predecessor). The Immigration Minister must use their discretion to decide, on the balance of probabilities, that the credentials offered are bona fide.

Not every use of discretion - for example, one to say "I don't think you understand what Talossa really is, here's some info, please rewrite your application accordingly" - is corrupt. That line of thought ends up with, for public officials, "anything not compulsory is forbidden" and hand the whole thing over to AI. Or, it ends at an arbitrary space, chosen for political advantage.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Your point makes sense when you say that it's not purely objective, and that there is a judgment call.  Ultimately, there are a ton of small judgment calls like that when processing applications, including the speed with which you act and (most particularly) who gets treated with enthusiasm after posting.

But surely it is much less subjective than reading an essay and deciding if it's up to snuff, and it is much less harmful if that judgment happens in the open?

I'm not even saying it's a bad idea to sort the wheat from the chaff when introducing immigrants, but there's a way to do it that has much less risk of corruption -- accidental or purposeful -- and which will be more useful to citizens.  Give high-enthusiasm applicants a public stamp of approval in some way.  It will be less work than rejecting some applicants and explaining to them why they were rejected, and it will have the same positive results.

[Tric'hard Lenxheir]

So what you are saying is that only prospective citizens who are intelligent enough to write an essay are capable of becoming useful active citizens?

No

That is exactly what I see in this proposal. You MUST write an essay basically to show how intelligent you are to be considered for citizenship. I for one could not write an essay that would be accepted by the academic elites and intelligence police on this website to save my life. If it were to be instituted retroactively I would immediately lose my citizenship. Not everyone is capable of hashing out an intelligent sounding essay in english, or even in their own home language. I like to think I have been somewhat active and involved, I know I am not intelligent enough to hold any office higher than that which I hold now (senator). I turned down the opportunity to hold cabinet level positions because I knew I couldn't do the job. That does not mean I am not capable of being involved. A nation (even a micronation) needs citizens, not all of them need to be highly intelligent members of the government or judges in the cort. I feel that this proposal will lead to a MASSIVE drop off in applications for citizenship and likely lead to a majority of applications being rejected.

[Mic’haglh Autófil, SMC EiP]

If it were to be instituted retroactively I would immediately lose my citizenship. [...] I know I am not intelligent enough to hold any office higher than that which I hold now (senator).

This law cannot be applied retroactively; Org.VII.14 explicitly prohibits ex post facto laws.

Also, Tric'hard, you need to stop selling yourself short, ok?

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Agreed 100%... Mic'haglh is right, there's no need for you to worry.

I will also note that while I am worried that this will hurt the immigration rate, I don't think anyone but people with quite significant disabilities or who speak English as a second language are likely to be put off by this... I think even with this new restriction, you'd have been welcomed to Talossa.

[King Txec]

As an educator of 20+ years, nothing makes me more sad than seeing someone sell him or herself short. Trichard, I find you to be adept and fully capable. Please always remember that! You are so much more than you give yourself credit for.

[Bråneu Excelsio]

"Recently", I had the opportunity to serve as Minister of Immigration for a few days, and my memories of those processes were filled with the following emotions:

• Excitement!
  We have a new person who wants to become a citizen of our kingdom.
• Disappointment:
      They didn't provide any social media profile or the one they did is private.
• Perplexity:
      The person filled out the form in a language that is not English (Will they be able to communicate in Wittenberg?)

In the "About me" section (which is clearly stated as the most important), they either left it blank or, worse, it's obvious that they want to join the kingdom with the sole intention of getting a) real immigration to the United States or b) a free ID card from a small country full of people eager to gain more citizens.

I believe raising the bar for immigrating to the Kingdom is not only a good thing but also in line with derivatist values. If we compare the rules for immigrating to a macronation, asking for just one paragraph is no problem at all.


Now, this brings me to a topic that perhaps hasn't been discussed enough: What constitutes an essay?

I recall my own immigration application, where I wrote in a mix of uppercase and lowercase letters, and it probably looked like the words of an absolute madman. If someone had told me at the time that I needed to write 2 to 3 paragraphs explaining why I wanted to join the Kingdom, what I could or wanted to contribute, etc., something as simple as "I want to contribute my grain of sand and see what's up, I find it fun in theory and I'd like to see it for myself" would likely have been enough?

I'm up for giving the MinImm or PermSec or w/e the ability to discard aplications that look like they're going nowhere. Trying to become a Talossan is really simple, yet 30 people found it too troublesome or easy to forget bcause none of the southamerican immigrants actually logged in to Witt more than 1 time, yet the time invested to post and see if they answer and having to terminate their applications is very time consuming and energy draining. I think this is a real problem for the current state of affairs, it's simple "too cheap" to try and become a talossan so over 95% of prospective citizens don't even care enough to finish their process. If I wrote a couple of paragraphs a few days ago to be admitted into a cool secret society calling themselves a micronation, I'd definitely would like to see if I was admitted, instead of just vaguely remembering I did a form.

[Tric'hard Lenxheir]

Agreed 100%... Mic'haglh is right, there's no need for you to worry.

I will also note that while I am worried that this will hurt the immigration rate, I don't think anyone but people with quite significant disabilities or who speak English as a second language are likely to be put off by this... I think even with this new restriction, you'd have been welcomed to Talossa.

I think you are wrong. I would not even know where to begin in writing an essay.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN]

I think you are wrong. I would not even know where to begin in writing an essay.

You did write an essay! The current law requires you to write an essay. This is the essay you wrote:

I find the concept intriguing. I chose Talossa after reading about several micronations and found the details most interesting. I like the inclusivity and the freedom. Let's face it I also find the concept a bit humorous 😂

I don't see any reason why that essay would be rejected under the new law either. Finding the concept humorous certainly indicates an understanding of what Talossa is.