Merit-Based Citizenship

I. Introduction: The Failure of Static Nationality Models

On Sunday morning at church, I spoke with a friend who had studied in New Zealand, moving there with a clear purpose—to complete university and work. He supported himself throughout his studies and made every effort to integrate into society, yet he encountered hostility from some native-born citizens who resented foreign students. He and others faced harassment, including locals driving by and spitting at them—not for any wrongdoing, but simply for being outsiders. This wasn’t random aggression; it reflected a deeper, ingrained mindset where some took their country for granted while rejecting those who genuinely wanted to belong.

This got me thinking: why do we assume that simply being born in a country makes someone an inherent asset to it? Meanwhile, passionate individuals who want to build, create, and contribute are locked out by rigid, outdated systems.

The world is becoming more complex. Digital interconnectedness has made nationality increasingly irrelevant. A more rational, thorough immigration system should replace the current bureaucratic, birth-based, and economically exploitative models. This essay proposes a merit-based citizenship system that evaluates individuals not just on their skills and contributions but also on cognitive alignment, personality fit, and cultural adaptability—ensuring societies function more efficiently and harmoniously.

II. The Catastrophe of America’s Immigration Flip-Flopping: A Case Study in Multicultural Malfunctions

Few places demonstrate the failure of modern immigration policies as clearly as the United States. Over the past decade, the country has been trapped in a self-destructive cycle of border policy reversals, where each political party undoes the work of the previous administration, leading to chaos.

The Democrat Party’s Immigration Incompetence Under the Biden administration, we’ve witnessed a reckless open-border approach that has:

• Allowed millions of unvetted individuals to enter the U.S. interior.
• Overwhelmed border towns and major cities with surges of illegal migration.
• Created a national security crisis, as criminals, cartels, and individuals with no allegiance to American values gain easy access.
• Resulted in "multicultural malfunctions," where forced diversity without integration leads to societal breakdowns.

The Democratic Party’s philosophy of unlimited immigration with zero enforcement has directly contributed to crime, economic strain, and social unrest. But this chaos is not just a failure of bad policy—it’s a predictable consequence of a system that grants citizenship and residency to people who have no stake in the country’s long-term success.

Trump’s Necessary Backtracking: Cleaning Up the Mess The Republican approach has consistently been to restore order after these crises.

• Trump’s administration previously tightened immigration policies, enforced vetting, and secured the border—a move that stabilized the situation.
• Now, in 2024, Trump is again faced with the task of reversing the damage, as millions of undocumented, unvetted individuals have flooded the system.

The Republican Party’s repeated role as the cleanup crew proves that America desperately needs a sustainable, long-term immigration framework—not just alternating between “open border” and “clean up” phases every four years.

III. Citizenship as an Earned Privilege: Applying for a Country Like a Job

"Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country."
— John F. Kennedy

Citizenship should be more than just a bureaucratic status granted by birthright; it should be an active commitment. Much like a job application or a driving test, obtaining or maintaining citizenship should require demonstration of:

• Cognitive and cultural adaptability: Proving one understands and aligns with the country’s values, customs, and laws.
• Skill-based contribution: Bringing unique talents that benefit society, whether in business, science, the arts, or other fields.
• Personal initiative: Engaging with the country proactively instead of relying on government-organized programs.
• Passion and enthusiasm: Showing a deep-seated desire to be part of the nation, rather than treating it as a mere economic convenience.
• A real-time test and face-to-face interview: Every applicant should undergo a live evaluation where they demonstrate their suitability in a controlled, professional setting. This would make full use of immigration officers, allowing them to engage in critical decision-making instead of just filing paperwork all day. By shifting away from outdated systems and woke agendas that are easily manipulated, this approach ensures higher-quality applicants are admitted.

This approach ensures that people who actively contribute and integrate are rewarded over those who passively occupy space.

IV. The Japanese Visa Dilemma: Passion vs. Bureaucracy

Consider two individuals attempting to build a life in Japan:

• Person A: The Passionate Japan Enthusiast (High School Dropout)
  • Speaks fluent Japanese and deeply respects the culture.
  • Has spent years studying Japan’s history and customs, visiting multiple times.
  • Possesses valuable skills in a relevant field (e.g., animation, game development).
• Person B: The Conventional Applicant (Four-Year Degree Holder)
  • Has a university degree but no real passion for Japan.
  • Moves there because it’s trendy and takes an English teaching job only because it’s the easiest visa option.
  • Doesn't integrate into the culture, viewing the experience as temporary and staying within expat enclaves.

Under Japan’s current system, Person B is prioritized simply because they have a degree, while Person A—despite being more valuable to the country—is locked out due to bureaucratic barriers. A merit-based immigration model would recognize skill, dedication, and long-term commitment over rigid academic qualifications.

V. The Role of MBTI and Cognitive Function in Merit-Based Citizenship

Different countries naturally favor certain personality traits based on their economic structure, social norms, and cultural expectations. Instead of assuming nationality is the key to integration, we should be analyzing personality types and cognitive functions to determine where people thrive.

• Japan & South Korea: Highly structured, work-driven cultures. ISTJs, INTJs, or ESTJs (organized, long-term planners) may adapt better than free-spirited ENFPs or INFPs who value independence over strict corporate hierarchies.
• Australia & New Zealand: Laid-back, outdoor-oriented societies. Extroverts (ESFPs, ENTPs, ESTPs) may thrive more than introverted individuals who prefer solitude.
• Germany & Switzerland: Precision-driven economies with a strong focus on efficiency. INTPs, ISTPs, and ENTJs (who prioritize logic and problem-solving) may integrate best.

Instead of forcing people to live where they are born, why not design immigration systems that recognize personality, psychology, and suitability?

VI. Conclusion: A Smarter, Ethical Approach to Citizenship

The current global immigration model is obsolete. It prioritizes birthright, bureaucracy, and economic exploitation over real human potential.

A merit-based citizenship system would:

• Prevent flip-flop immigration policies in countries like the U.S.
• Ensure immigrants are genuinely aligned with their chosen country.
• Hold native-born citizens accountable for their role in national progress.
• Utilize cognitive compatibility to help people live where they thrive.
• Implement real-time testing and interviews to ensure genuine applicants.

People should live where they function best—not where they happened to be born. It’s time for a rational, sustainable, and merit-based approach to global movement.