Immigration Policy: Using Salad Bowls and Smart Contracts to Create an Antifragile Society

An unique, multiple perspective discussion of the nature of diversity, then a proposal for a smart contract to handle immigration policies.

Introduction

Both the Left and the Right are wrong about immigration and cultural diversity. The truth is more complicated than what it seems. As discussed in Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman's book, Thinking Fast and Slow, most people use system 1 thinking and does not consider the whole scope of question. Rather than answering the actual question, people tend to answer a simplified a version of the question. People who fall for system 1 fallacies end up either naively believing that diversity is a virtue or spreading irrational xenophobic hate. The truth is that diversity is simply a tool that can be used for both good and evil. Those in power have the responsibility to choose how to use it, but ideally that power should be decentralized. A customization smart contract can be implemented to handle global immigration policies.

What is Diversity?

Diversity is the condition that things are different from each other. It is variance in qualities, ideas, traits, etc. The greater the diversity, the higher the variance. This can lead to chaos, entropy, creativity, volatility, disorder, and innovation. Nassim Taleb introduced the important idea of antifragility in his book, Antifragile: Things that Gain from Disorder. In an antifragile system, volatility leads to improvements, while in a fragile system, volatility leads to destruction. Most people don't understand antifragility. As a result, we have Liberals who try to increase volatility in a fragile system and Conservatives who fear volatility. Instead, we should be striving to change the system from fragile into antifragile.

Diversity is the driving force of evolution. Biology is an antifragile system. Imperfections in genetic replication can be good or bad. A good change can lead to the next generation surviving better while a bad change can result in death by cancer or genetic disorders. The bad changes are eliminated from the gene pool while the good changes pass on and the species survives. Genetic diversity is good, because it hedges the risks against a variety of possible catastrophes through changes in the environment. Individuals with different traits survive better under different conditions. So the more diversity, the less likely that every individual of the species would be wiped out.

Diversity is also the foundation of capitalism: comparative advantage. When people have diverse skill sets, they can trade to make everyone better off. Homogeneity of production would lead to many inefficiencies. This diversity of ideas and skills drives innovation in the free market. Diversity is good in the context of capitalism because it is an antifragile system.

However, diversity is not good in every situation. With the onset of the industrial revolution, some systems have became increasingly fragile. The assembly line selects against variance. If one part is slightly deformed, then the whole system breaks apart. For mass produced goods of our modern age, we highly value consistency. People want every can of Coca Cola to taste exactly the same; nobody wants diverse tasting Coca Cola. Similarly, in any corporate job place, when people have expectations of how the world is supposed to work and what is supposed to happen, diversity leads to chaos and destruction. People perceive volatile markets as very risky. People spend their whole lives studying and avoiding risks rather than seeking to gain from the disorder. They end up living very fearful and restricted lives rather than living freely as warrior poets.

Salad Bowl vs. Melting Pot

The commonly accepted story is that Americans should be proud of being part of a melting pot of cultural diversity. This is a lie.

1. A melting pot is a bland shade of brown. It is conformity and dullness. It is the opposite of diversity.

2. Society is fragile. Diversity in a fragile system is disasterous. Just because diversity is good in some cases does not mean that it is good in all cases. Fragile diversity < no diversity < antifragile diversity.

If the human species were to survive, Liberals need to stop promoting fragile diverse systems that do not work. Conservatives don't have a good solution either, but at least they aren't accelerating the destruction.

The United States or any other country with immigrants, is more like a salad bowl than a melting pot. Different groups mix together, but they don't fully integrate. I can find people in Chinatown who have been in the US for 20+ years and can't speak any coherent English. If America is truly a melting pot, then everyone would be speaking a blended form of broken English that takes words and grammar from dozens of other languages. It is somewhat true when you order food at exotic restaurants, but is not true most of the time for practical purposes. Even after multiple generations, many people still keep their original ethnic identities without fully integrating. This is neither good nor bad. It all depends on the specifics of which parts you integrate and which parts you keep uniqueness. The ideal situation is to speak and write coherent English and fit in day-to-day, but still able to provide a fresh and different perspective. Therefore, America is a salad bowl with dressing ingredients that are melted together.

Criticism of Liberal Immigration Policies

Let's conduct a thought experiment. Suppose that each country is a private Internet forum. Forums want to have lots of lively discussions. Diversity of opinions keep the discussions lively. However, forums also have moderators who ban trolls and other toxic members. Trump is a ban-hammer happy moderator whom half the forum loves and half the forum hates. Lots of old forum members wish to get rid of new concern trolls popping up. Some of which are organized attacks from other forums. These trolls do not add to the discussions and only incite negativity and violence, yet some members ideologically believe in banning nobody at all even though the trolls are clearly decreasing the quality of the forum discussions. Trump wishes to temporarily shutdown registration of new accounts from IPs where trolls are most likely to come from and IP ban trolls.

This makes the Social Justice Worriers cry out, "Not everyone from these IPs are trolls! If you IP ban the IP address of a school just because it had one troll, nobody else from that school could register! We are a forum founded upon the principle that new members from across the Interwebs can register to join the forum! My grandfather at one point used the IP address xxx:xyz:xyzq! How dare you to ban that IP address! I'm fearing for my life. Trump will probably ban my account too. Some of these trolls are good people too! I knew a guy who used to troll online who bought me a beer once! #notalltrolls

First they came for the trolls and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a troll.
Then they came for the DDOS attackers and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a DDOS attacker.
Then they came for the bot accounts and I did not speak out-
Because I was not a bot.
Then they came for me- and there was nobody left to speak for me."

Diversity is good when you join the forum, obey the forum terms and conditions, and contribute positively to the discussion. Diversity is not an excuse to break forum rules and then expect premium membership. Illegal immigrants are like unauthorized bot accounts. If the forum was a Bitcoin faucet that awards people for joining, then the illegal bots are leeching off the system without contributing.

Culture is not your friend. Old members should not impose forum culture on new members, but new members should not impose their own cultures on the old members either.

Smart Contract Proposal

My proposal is to use customization smart contracts to regulate immigration policy. All international boarders should be "open", but before you can enter a new country, you must draft up a new smart contract where you explain what you plan to do, how you will add value to that country during the duration of the visit, and the consequences of breaking the contract. This smart contract proposal would be anonymously sent to current residents of the country you seek to enter on a public blockchain. A sufficient number of current residents must peer review and verify your application before you could enter the country. A good implementation of this system would solve a lot of the problems we currently have with immigration policy.

Any thoughts or suggestions?