Social Ethical Research on the Future of Social Security in Germany under Conditions of Selective and Non-selective Migration - Social Justice under Conditions of Scarcity

德国社会保障制度的未来构想旨在实现社会正义，必须考虑移民流动，特别是因为自2014年以来，移民流动获得了新的质量。然而，从社会伦理的角度来看，仅仅从移民对国家社会保障体系的好处来考虑移民是有问题的，因为这会降低有需要的人对西方经济和社会体系的经济价值。除了对国家利益的任何考虑之外，基督教社会伦理学作为一门神学学科，认为移民是人，他们有权获得帮助，有权自由行动，有权有尊严地生活。因此，在社会内部建立公正的社会机构这一最初的社会伦理目标必须植根于全球背景。为了摆脱国家社会正义和全球正义之间的不同研究目标的困境，正义的社会和全球层面不应被视为相互对立，而应被认为是相互一致的（Mack，2015）。参照关于移民问题的较新的哲学和基督教伦理辩论，将制定一套伦理标准，阐明在德国等西方福利国家，何时、在何种程度上和以何种形式接纳移民是一项普遍义务，从规范上讲是公正的和合乎伦理的，同时考虑到国家社会机构的能力有限。我们需要的是一种连贯一致的道德综合，解释在现有社会保障资源有限的条件下，在未来和当前国家和全球正义义务的框架内，如何保障有关双方的人性，即公民的公民权利和移民的人权。

A future conception of the German social security system, that aims to achieve social justice, has to take immigration movements into consideration, especially because they have gained a new quality since 2014. However, to think about immigration only in terms of its benefits for a national social security system is problematic from a social ethics point of view, as it would reduce people in need to their financial value for western economies and social systems. Beyond any consideration for national benefits, Christian Social Ethics as a theological discipline, considers immigrants as human beings, who have a right to receive help, a right to freedom of movement, and a right to live in dignity. Therefore, the original social ethical aim of creating just, social institutions within societies, has to be embedded in a global context. In order to escape the dilemma of differing research objectives between national social justice and global justice, social and global dimensions of justice should not be considered as contrary to each other, but should be thought of as being consistent with each other (Mack, 2015). With reference to the newer philosophical and Christian-ethical debate on immigration, a set of ethical criteria will be developed, which spell out when, to what extent and in which form the admission of immigrants in western welfare states like Germany is a universal obligation, normatively just and ethical, while at the same time considering the limited capacities of national social institutions. What is needed, is a consistent ethical synthesis that explains how humanity can be guaranteed for both parties concerned, i.e. citizens with civil rights and immigrants with human rights, under the existing conditions of limited social security resources, and within the framework of future and present national and global justice obligations.