Alexander Hamilton, an emigrant, was one of the unsung founding fathers of the modern day United States and the first Secretary of Treasury.

He attempted to institute in Americans a philosophy of meritocracy, the idea that it is not where you come from, what your background is, what you have done in the past, who your parents were or how you started out that matters, but rather what you can do in the present. What counts is what you can bring to the table. Hamilton believed if you worked hard, you should rise to the top.

This is what the idea of USA was based on, and why the America is what it is today. It explains why the whole world chases the American dream (or the Hamilton dream). It is why we all want to immigrate there, raise our kids there, and not grow old there. This describes the cause of immigrants who pour into the USA from all over the world. They are all here chasing the Hamilton dream, wanting only to be fairly compensated for what they bring to the table.

The American dream is however a distant fantasy for many people who have moved to America. There are some things that just cannot be attained by all. The question then is why. Is this because of where they come from, their cultural background, their language, or their social class? Is the idea of meritocracy at all realistic?

Immigration around the world has become a hot button issue. The UAE is denying Iraqis access into the country as are the Saudis. Indian and Pakistani nationals working in Dubai are second class citizens, the French are wary of the invasion of their country by Francophone Africans. In spite of this resistance, more than at any other time in history, the world is becoming a global village, with cultures all around the worlds integrating. People around the world are today less ignorant about other races, people and cultures than at any other time in history, and this is why the rise in xenophobia around the world is particularly worrying. Even nations that have traditionally been very welcoming to immigrants are slowly tightening the restrictions and making it almost impossible to move into these nations.

This leaves the populations in developing nations, in a conundrum, in effect asking, is it morally reprehensible to violate the laws of the countries of the rich world? Is it morally reprehensible to thrust yourself on the people of another country in contraventio of its laws? This is not an obvious question, especially as such immigrants are after all not simply seeking a change of view, but rather are pushed away from their countries by the lack of economic opportunity, oppressive governments and insecurity. Their decision to leave friends and family in search of a better one abroad is never an easy one. Still it is my opinion that they ought to stay in their home countries.

A lot has been said and written about the great numbers of eminently qualified Africans and Asians who emigrate from their countries after having cost the nation great resources in training and education. These individuals move on to the already rich West where they are quickly absorbed into the system, making these countries even wealthier. The tightening of entry regulations by the industrialized countries could therefore be viewed as a blessing in disguise. Necessity being the mother of invention, the restriction on emigration of the best and brightest from the developing world will compel them to make the best of their situation in their home countries. Their efforts would then have a beneficial effect on the rest of their countries, not just economically but also politically and socially.

Most of the contributors to this forum would for example, make great journalists. The initiative taken by the facilitators of the forum would also have led to the same result if they stayed on in Kenya. Brain drain is itself the biggest plight of developing nations. It is a double tragedy because not only does the nation lose the investment it had made in the education and training of the individual, but it also loses the potential for contribution to wider change in that individual.

I propose that we assimilate Alexander Hamilton's dream, make it our own in our nations. In the grand scheme of things our nations are losing out, and the disadvantage is growing ever bigger. It behooves us now to explore the reasons that compel these people to leave Kenya and to follow up on this by creating such an environment in the home country as would keep them at home. We must also lobby the developed nations to step up immigration restrictions and assist them in enforcing such restrictions as keep people here where they are needed in the most. We must do this so that we can develop and stop the process that results in the transfer of talent and ability away from the countries that need it the most.

Skeptics will say that migration promotes the exchange of knowledge and ideas. This is a wholly different matter though; the exchange of ideas does not have to be stifled restrictive migration policies. Developing nations can institute exchange programs that allow people to study abroad, experience different cultures and bring these experience back home when they return. Tanzania has had a successful student exchange program that allows them to send students overseas and then have these students return to the country and apply themselves successfully. This has perhaps been a contributing factor to the double-digit growth rate that Tanzania has experienced and is forecast to maintain for some time yet.

It is true that Kenyan leaders have failed us, but haven't the emigrants failed us even more. They run away from our collective troubles instead of providing solutions. With regard to this, the dual citizenship requirement being lobbied for by the emigrant caucuses across the global are counter-productive and do little to assist Kenya. Why should we make special provisions for people who have decided to leave and make their home elsewhere? Why should we accord them the same rights as people who have decided to tough it up here and make a difference?

You leave you lose.