What I would tell Matt Walsh about a blanket ban on “third-world” immigration

I don’t know it, actually. 

Here’s my argument against a blanket ban on all “third-world” immigration. 

If I ever had the ear of Matt Walsh, I would encourage him to spend a year or two (definitely more than a few weeks) in my beloved Tanzania, one of those “third-world” countries affected by a blanket ban. I would arrange for him to stay with my friend Lucy, who would, no doubt, happily welcome a complete stranger in her home. 

He would get to stay in a concrete block house with one outdoor spigot, an outdoor (spotlessly clean) outhouse and bucket shower, and only the electricity provided by a couple of solar panels. He would experience the inconvenience of living in a house that floods at least twice a year, the tedium of traveling as a sweaty sardine in a bus that takes an hour to travel ten miles, and perhaps feel the desperation of trying to find reliable wages in a city where education and employment are not guaranteed.

But he would also laugh till his sides hurt at Lucy’s sense of humor. He would taste her astonishingly good cooking, despite having access only to a charcoal stove. He would see how hard she works, how physically strong she is, and how smart she is, despite her lack of education and opportunity. He might be tempted to think, “I would love for this woman to be my neighbor. I would love to get a front-row seat to see what she could do with the American Dream. She would make America a better place.” 

While experiencing this different way of life, he might be surprised to discover for himself why a recent study determined that Tanzanians are happier than Americans. Unlike Americans, Tanzanians don’t have an epidemic of loneliness and isolation. Community life is an assumption in Tanzania. People share, even when they have little. And Tanzania is inhabited by some of the most faith-filled people I’ve ever met. Like Lucy, who trusted God when she thought her house would be knocked down. Like Emmanuel, who daily chooses a life of sacrificial ministry and lives content in Christ. They’ve taught me more about faith than just about anyone else.

So how would a blanket ban on all “third-world” immigration harm the United States? We would exclude people who can teach us about living in interdependence—maybe helping us solve our loneliness problem. We would miss the opportunity to do life with people who may be able to help us understand more about how to find happiness and contentment. As Christians, we would lose the chance to understand the Bible through non-Western eyes, to deepen our perspective in ways we didn’t even realize we were missing. 

Since we are a nation founded by “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” how will it change the fabric of our culture when our only definition of an acceptable “refugee” is now a white, wealthy South African? Already, our young people are becoming more and more jaded, entitled, discontented, and ambivalent to the cost of freedom and opportunity in the United States. When we then ban the very people who help us to appreciate and treasure the uniqueness of our country, who will we become?

I’m all for assimilation. Let’s require immigrants to learn English. Let’s ensure they value and respect our Constitution before they step foot in our country. And we can’t realistically invite in every needy person. (See my next post about that.) But let’s not forget that what has always made America great is diversity. We are not a perfect country; immigrants have important things to teach us, and God’s glory is only fully expressed through the lens of all cultures. 

In short, there are all kinds of downsides to a blanket ban on “third-world” immigration. Lucy isn’t trying to immigrate to the U.S., but many like her need to. And we need them. 

But there’s more: Click here to read my response to Allie Beth Stuckey’s response to Matt’s post.