The fact that we have different nations, different interests, culture etc. Do you think that it is more better if we have no borders?
sort by best latest
Excellent. There is some safety in diversity of viewpoints -- in democratic process. But America is losing this to homogenized Corporate Party media. Demopublicans look just like Republicrats. Voting is ignored for the convention script
I wasn't suggesting, our system is perfect...but it is necessary to having competing gov't for the same reason it is necessary to have competing Shampoo products. With only one option....quality goes down.
Who, if not the sovereign nation or State itself, would determine what the borders would be? How would they be enforced? What of the tyrrant that wants to take from this "borderless" nation?
Borders, by now, are pretty well set. They'd be enforced by a global democratic body. Tyrants would be squished if they tried.
Yeah, because the UN and their army of little blue helmets have done a great job in squishing global tyrants.
The UN and the world today have little resemblance to the model I had in mind, so isn't a useful comparison.
Oh...I see...we need an even bigger global gov't bureaucracy with no place to escape to. I guess it's a good thing they plan to colonize Mars in the next 10 yrs. Unless they Statist have jurisdiction there as well.
The "no place to escape to" is your own invention. Obviously I neither desire that or believe it would be the result. Since you have no interest in my proposal go burn strawmen elsewhere.
I can't have an interest in something you haven't articulated any details on. But from prior comments I would venture a guess that it involves more gov't rather than less. If so, fortunately for you...it will probably happen in one form or another.
So what if there was more government? It is only your opinion which equates government with ultimate evil and enslavement. Some government is bad does not mean all government is bad. Your projecting an opinion onto others as if it were a truth.
I wasnt projecting an opinion, it was pretty clear that was my opinion. I was predicting that your solution would involve a larger gov't solution. Yet I have never known of a tyrannical regime that limited the role of gov't and empowered the indiv
You can help the HubPages community highlight top quality content by ranking this answer up or down.
Oneness is divine. But not when ego is in charge. Take a Hitler or a Stalin and put them in charge of a one-world government, you then have no refuge -- no escape. America is losing.
Um, yeah, ok. Borders are down. 40,000 Congolese rebels decide your neighborhood is nice. So they rape and murder your mom, sisters girlfriend/wife, take everything you own and burn your hood to the ground, then shoot you in the face. Then move on.
Explain how removing borders, whether national or home, would in any way bring about peace. Be specific.
Residentstone, what you describe sounds a lot like Vietnam. Or Guantanemo.
Well Stan then go live in one of those places for a year. Let's say Yemen or Haiti, or yes the Democratic Republic of Congo and invite the whole country back to you're place since you love everyone so much. You and Sean Penn can have a barbecue.
Cool. And you're invited. Here's hoping you could learn a thing or two from the experience. I don't know if Penn can make it. His boots are on the ground walking the walk and HE is getting things done.
Whats Sean Penn doing? Fixing things that will be destroyed again next year? Good going stupid! There are 50 million people here in the good ole USA that could use his help. Just saying dude, we need borders like we need cops. Unfortunately.
You do know that on Mexico's southern border they are very strict with controlling their border. That is not "white" people, but "brown" people stopping other "brown" people. Making it a racial issue is not realistic.
You can say that again, if you had been born in Ethiopia, LOL.
So you're really saying you would be cool with the Taliban and Al-quaeda moving right next door??? Sorry, I just don't get it.
Residentstone, there will be no Taliban and Al-quaeda next door. If there were any, they would be in the next door prison.
Well if there were no borders they would be able to do that, no? There not in prison now, so why then? Sure all my rebuttals are extreme, but only to make a point. Careful what you wish for.
Residentstone, they are not in prison now because they are within their own borders and you can't do much with them when they are not within your borders.
So now you're getting rid of borders to arrest people? One love brah!
A beautiful ideal, if something like Star Trek's Federation could be realized, but more than likely we'd end up with a Totalitarian state worse than Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Soviet Union.
Explain how that could work. Explain how people would define their homes, towns, States and possessions. Be specific.