Where Do “Our Values” Come From?
In immigration policy, expressions such as “our values” and “our way of life” are often used as implicit premises.
They are presented as legitimate and self-evident, without requiring justification.
However, this reveals a deeper underlying assumption:
That the values of the nation are inherently right.
This assumption is rarely stated explicitly, yet it strongly shapes policy design.
It is precisely this premise that generates structural problems within institutions.
The Structure of Abstract Value Language
In immigration discourse, the following expressions are repeatedly used:
- Our values
- Liberal values
- Shared values
- Integration
- Social cohesion
- Way of life
For instance, discussions around the “Australian way of life,” as seen in Quillette, are situated within this framework.
These concepts are not inherently problematic.
However, they share a critical feature:
They are abstract and lack operational criteria.
What Happens When Values Are Treated as “Right”
The issue is not the content of these values, but how they are positioned.
They are treated as unquestioned standards—
as something already defined as “right,” against which individuals are measured.
This creates a structure in which:
- What is “correct” is predetermined
- Individuals are assessed based on their conformity to it
In this framework, institutions function as follows:
- Those deemed compatible are accepted
- Those deemed incompatible are excluded
Yet the criteria for this judgment are not clearly defined.
As a result, “rightness” remains outside the institution,
while decisions are made within it.
Why This Cannot Function as an Institution
For an institution to function properly, it must ensure:
- Clear criteria
- Consistent application
- Predictable outcomes
However, values treated as external “truths” cannot meet these conditions.
Because what is considered “right” exists outside the institutional framework,
it cannot be examined, tested, or justified within it.
As a result:
Criteria become vague, decisions become arbitrary, and outcomes become unpredictable.
This is precisely the structural mechanism that produces distrust.
Why Value-Based Demands Lead to Exclusion
Policies that demand value alignment appear to promote integration.
In reality, they function as mechanisms of compatibility screening.
Such screening is not governed by institutional rules, but by subjective interpretation.
In this situation:
- Why someone is considered incompatible
- How that conclusion is reached
remains unexplained.
Only the outcome is presented.
As a result, the system loses legitimacy and becomes a mechanism of exclusion.
This creates a paradox: policies designed to protect values instead generate division.
The Problem Is Not Values, but Structure
The issue is not the values themselves.
Values such as freedom and democracy are essential foundations of society.
The problem lies in how they are used.
Specifically:
- Fixing national values as “right”
- Demanding conformity to them
This structure itself is the problem.
Under such conditions, institutions cannot maintain explainability.
Values Must Be Translated into Institutions
Values should not be imposed in their abstract form.
They must be translated into institutional design.
For example:
- Compliance with laws
- Fulfillment of contractual obligations
- Access to education and language opportunities
Only when values are articulated in such concrete forms can they function within an institutional framework.
At this point, “rightness” becomes internal to the system.
Integration Is Participation, Not Value Alignment
Integration is not the alignment of values.
Integration is the result of participation in institutions.
The key question is not whether individuals share values, but:
- Whether they participate in the system
- Whether they meet its conditions
Social cohesion emerges as a result of this participation.
“Control” and “Values” Share the Same Structure
Policies centered on control regulate external behavior.
Policies centered on values attempt to regulate internal beliefs.
However, both share the same underlying structure:
They impose externally defined “rightness” onto individuals.
Under this structure, institutions lose explainability and amplify distrust.
What Is Needed Is Design, Not Assumption
The central question in immigration policy is not “what is right.”
The real questions are:
- What kind of institutions should be designed
- What conditions should apply
- How those conditions should be enforced
Values are not assumptions to be imposed.
They must be designed into institutions.
*This post is positioned as a chapter that makes up the table of contents in the Balanced Coexistence Model.