In immigration policy, expressions such as \u201cour values\u201d and \u201cour way of life\u201d are often used as implicit premises.
They are presented as legitimate and self-evident, without requiring justification.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, this reveals a deeper underlying assumption:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That the values of the nation are inherently right.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This assumption is rarely stated explicitly, yet it strongly shapes policy design.
It is precisely this premise that generates structural problems within institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In immigration discourse, the following expressions are repeatedly used:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For instance, discussions around the \u201cAustralian way of life,<\/a>\u201d as seen in Quillette, are situated within this framework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These concepts are not inherently problematic. They are abstract and lack operational criteria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The issue is not the content of these values, but how they are positioned.<\/p>\n\n\n\n They are treated as unquestioned standards\u2014 This creates a structure in which:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this framework, institutions function as follows:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yet the criteria for this judgment are not clearly defined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a result, \u201crightness\u201d remains outside the institution, For an institution to function properly, it must ensure:<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, values treated as external \u201ctruths\u201d cannot meet these conditions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Because what is considered \u201cright\u201d exists outside the institutional framework, As a result:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Criteria become vague, decisions become arbitrary, and outcomes become unpredictable. Policies that demand value alignment appear to promote integration. Such screening is not governed by institutional rules, but by subjective interpretation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this situation:<\/p>\n\n\n\n remains unexplained.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Only the outcome is presented.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a result, the system loses legitimacy and becomes a mechanism of exclusion. The issue is not the values themselves. The problem lies in how they are used.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Specifically:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This structure itself is the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under such conditions, institutions cannot maintain explainability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Values should not be imposed in their abstract form. For example:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Only when values are articulated in such concrete forms can they function within an institutional framework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At this point, \u201crightness\u201d becomes internal to the system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Integration is not the alignment of values.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Integration is the result of participation in institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The key question is not whether individuals share values, but:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Social cohesion emerges as a result of this participation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Policies centered on control regulate external behavior. However, both share the same underlying structure:<\/p>\n\n\n\n They impose externally defined \u201crightness\u201d onto individuals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under this structure, institutions lose explainability and amplify distrust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The central question in immigration policy is not \u201cwhat is right.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The real questions are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Values are not assumptions to be imposed. *This post is positioned as a chapter that makes up the\u00a0table of contents in the Balanced Coexistence Model<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
However, they share a critical feature:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWhat Happens When Values Are Treated as \u201cRight\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
as something already defined as \u201cright,\u201d against which individuals are measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
while decisions are made within it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWhy This Cannot Function as an Institution<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
it cannot be examined, tested, or justified within it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This is precisely the structural mechanism that produces distrust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWhy Value-Based Demands Lead to Exclusion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
In reality, they function as mechanisms of compatibility screening.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
This creates a paradox: policies designed to protect values instead generate division.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nThe Problem Is Not Values, but Structure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Values such as freedom and democracy are essential foundations of society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nValues Must Be Translated into Institutions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
They must be translated into institutional design.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nIntegration Is Participation, Not Value Alignment<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n\u201cControl\u201d and \u201cValues\u201d Share the Same Structure<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Policies centered on values attempt to regulate internal beliefs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWhat Is Needed Is Design, Not Assumption<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
They must be designed into institutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\nJapan\/World Immigration News<\/h2>\n\n\n