It's that simple. I've posted about it before, even last year. Border of house, border of gated community, border of nation, same type of thing. Borders are legitimate. People are stuck in an ideal that can't be a reality yet. Anarchy is an ideal, but it won't work yet. Consciousness needs to evolve to be able to handle living in these ideal ways. It doesn't just work just because you want it to while others aren't ready to respect shit :/
Even Anarchy unless you are an Anarcho-Communist type still has the idea of private property and thus borders. Yet, I do agree they are not ready.
Most of the population doesn't grasp critical thinking. That seems pretty critical if you are not going to live in a world where you have a parental substitute telling you what you can and cannot do even as an adult.
This is the latest post that inspired me to write mine. Insane payout for compassionate stupidity.
That's not an honest, real payout. It's all vote buying bullshit... lol.
Yeah I saw that.
Its not simple at all and in fact the nuances between the border of your underpants and the borders of a nation are very much incomparable despite using the same concepts. That's why the forefathers didn't include any clause or mention of regulating borders for migration and without migration there's no nation, not just no provinces or counties and cities and towns, and none of those could have a clause for regulating their borders against migration because they wouldn't have a leg to stand on. If we start saying no to migration we'd committed our forefathers to criminals.
I literally closed my eyes for a few seconds trying to gain insight on why our forefathers left the regulations-clause out, while simultaneously trying to imagine what the U.S. would look like with an open-door, free-for-all policy, without anyone having a clue who entered in, and for what reason.
In utopia, everyone would have good intentions; but, that's just it...this world has increasingly, decreasing signs of utopia, and many who enter in mean no good thing for the nation...with, a both spoken and unspoken, economic-intention to bring America to 'her' knees.
And, then, just like that I got a glimpse of why the clause may have been omitted. Are you ready? Hold on to your hat:
The U.S. was founded on Christian principles. They knew that to own something the people would have to, as much as this burdens me to say, would have to fight to keep/protect its borders.
As much as I'd like to think the immigration issue will be resolved peaceably, I would not be at all surprised, especially with a Wall going up, (fueled with the words of POTUS: "Mexico's gonna pay for that wall") that the foundation for a second-round of war between the U.S. and Mexico might be in the future.
The Mexican-American War resulted in Mexico losing a lot of land to the U.S., that many continue to believe is theirs. Does this help explain the root principle of the Exodus into the US.? Perhaps. Will the immigrants retreat to 'U.S. regulations' or...I'll let you fill in the blank.
Just a thought: Mexico is letting its allies pass go to proceed onward to enter into the U.S. Could they be building an extended army on this side of the border? If Stuff HTF
the U.S. would have to deflect the internal war on its homeland, while preventing attack from across the border.
Of course, you realize this is probably more than a thought, born of a Higher Power than my own. And, as I wrote this post I kept getting flashes of Bush 1's unsettling speech decades ago...NWO...
This got lengthier than I anticipated, and I pray it makes sense.
Peace.
If you have the right to stop who and why they immigrate then obviously you could lawfully exercise that right, as could anyone else.