Borders are imaginary lines drawn on our planet that separate us, confine us in narrowly defined boxes and are used to controll us. They are an insult to logic which tells us that the only real separation that can be made is between individuals, not between the plots of land we were born on.

a global filled with the writing of people thinking the world belongs to them

Our masters have decided that we need special permissions to travel the earth and these permissions are not only related to the land we want to enter, we even need approval from the land we want to leave. Furthermore entry permissions are not only based on the individual travelling, but on the country that issues the passport. I can travel freely to over 150 countries in this world without being checked at all, while people born in a less fortunate place can only travel to few other countries and are subject to extensive vetting that often ends with being denied permission.

I have seen this madness many times with my colleagues from all over the world. Its a sad show, when we meet there is no fundamental difference between us, but our experiences travelling and living are vastly different, based on the most stupid criterion anyone could come up with, a 'nationality'.

source

Did I earn this privileged? No, not at all. While I have a lot of freedom, there are many people a lot smarter than me that are trapped in systems of oppression and are denied basic freedoms and rights. And the reason is that were born in the wrong the place at the wrong time.

Liberland

Liberland is a country claimed by some anarchists to break the cycle of national controls. They issue passports and other diplomatic services. You can try to travel using a liberland passport, but obviously most countries do not accept it. They claim that it is just a piece of paper that does not bring any special rights. One cannot just create a country... Also for that special permissions are required. Usually a clear sign of a congame.

But what really confuses me is the following. While our great democracies do not accept a liberland passport and will deny entry without even checking the person that wants to travel, they are very happy to accept passports issued by dictators.

There the argument is 'The poor people in the dictatorships need a right to travel. We cant just deny them.' While I obviously agree with that statement, because all borders are bs, this provides a rather bizarre picture.

Peaceful people wanting to establish their own state on a small patch of unclaimed land may not do so. Because they dont have the required legitimation. But when you take guns and form a violent gang, kill some people and establish a regime of suppression and terror, that makes you a 'real' country, one that is able to issue magic travel passports. The citizens will usually still be denied entry into our wonderful countries, but at least they will be checked and taken seriously.

My question is what exactly is the reason that a group of free people cannot be a state, while a dictatorship is. Which act of the dictator exactly is it that provides the legitimation as a proper country.

My only answer I can think of so far is that the idea of freedom inherently is opposed to national states. The game is to rule people, when that is not your goal you are not playing their game, hence they cannot accept you. But a dictator is very much playing their game, maybe using a strategy that they dont like, but it still is the same game.