But if restrictionism has greater appeal—at least to some voters—than the more self-flagellating forms of progressive humanitarianism, it is still not a position capable of building a durable national majority. Indeed, these two poles in the immigration debate feed off each other, locking the country in an unproductive, zero-sum dispute. Conservatives and some moderates, fearful that liberals wish to pursue a de facto open-borders policy, embrace restrictionist politicians as the least-bad option. Meanwhile, elite progressives, correctly judging that full-blown restrictionism alienates many voters, feel little pressure to moderate their rhetoric or take concerns over low-skilled and irregular migration seriously. The result is an immigration debate pitting the “woke” against the “MAGA,” with the broad majority of Americans of all colors left out. For Republicans, selectionism offers a way to break this impasse—one that meets the concerns of their existing voters while broadening the party’s appeal to the first- and second-generation voters already trending in its direction. The children and grandchildren of post-1965 immigrants would be especially drawn to a selectionist approach that welcomes productive newcomers while rejecting any compulsion to set immigration policy on the basis of the racialist fixations of cosmopolitan liberals.

As for what a selectionist immigration agenda might entail, much depends on whether it should center on bloodless materialism or some robust vision for how newcomers might shape America’s cultural and political character. In light of the changing global economic and demographic landscape, and challenges and opportunities as varied as renewed great-power competition and the rise of intelligent machines, there is a strong case for focusing on attracting superstar talent. As Caleb Watney of the Institute for Progress has observed, “the advantage to a country that attracts geniuses compounds over time, as clusters form around them—talent attracts more talent—which helps all the individuals and firms in such clusters become more productive than they would be in isolation.” Post-Brexit Britain has moved sharply in this direction. Having asserted the sovereign right to control immigrant inflows, the British government is adopting a points-based immigration system and launching a new “high potential individual” visa aimed at graduates of the world’s most prestigious research universities. And though populist critics warn that the government’s selectionist approach is inviting an anti-immigration revolt, the survey evidence thus far suggests otherwise.