What if we stopped treating immigration as a moral battleground and started treating it like a policy puzzle?

The migration debate often feels like a permanent state of emergency, split between two tribes shouting past each other about whether the phenomenon is a grand moral imperative or an existential threat. This piece cuts through that noise by arguing that we are asking the wrong questions entirely. By moving away from the binary of good versus bad, it explores the unglamorous, technical trade-offs that actually define how nations function. It is a compelling reminder that the best way to lower the temperature on such a volatile topic might be to make it significantly more boring.

Read at source: Aeon