You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: I Do Not Want "Closed Borders" Because I'm Not An Immoral, Fearful Idiot
People aren't as uninvolved and unaffected as that. Immigration en masse is highly destructive. If someone breaks into your property using force to respond isn't groundless.
except a country isn't anyone's property, it is a geographical location in which some of the property is owned by private civilians and the other parts are unowned or claimed to be owned by a gang of criminals.
The state may be immoral, but it's still the state's property no? Legitimate question. And I think more than just a claim because they have the power to possess and enforce it.
My serious answer is it depends on what form of government your society has created. The USA enforces private property rights, you buy land, you own it, but we als have public land, like national parks, military bases, highways?
You cannot own land in the USA. You either pay rent to the government or armed thugs will take it from you.
no, the State does not legitimately own any property. Ownership comes about by either 1. Homesteading or 2. voluntary transaction. the State did not acquire ANY land through EITHER of those means.
The way you anarchists talk is sophistry of the highest order. Your entire school of thought assumes humans will act a certain way if there is no government when all evidence we have, see history, suggest the opposet reaction is in fact most likely.
Further you assume that believing in any government is a misdiagnosis of ethics, rather than an informed ethical choice.
You have just lived the same way for to long. Informed ethical choice? right so lets look at the history of the governments you are "ethically chosing" So every proxy war with the USA nd russia was part of that informed choice? 250,000 children being slaughtered by the U.S and U.K since the invasion was that part of the informed choice? How about Vietnam? 70 million native americans slaughtered? we have done it your way and it just causes mass murder.
The governing way has caused nothing but death and destruction. You can't give a small group of people power. It is dangerous. History suggest nothing if you haven't actually read any history. The native americans for the most part were doing pretty well without governing bodies till a bunch of people with a governing body decided to commit genocide.
China's genocide of 120 million i believe. The emperor was responsible. Your system is fucking shit and many have had enough. Anarchy is doing it without permission. So if i think something is unjust i do something about it regardless of law and regardless of who's governing. I have a royal family that bleed my nation dry. These systems are fucking poison and we have become far to accustom to it.
Pray tell, what do we assume humans will act like when there is no government? I generally assume humans will act like humans. Humans are capable of being assholes and are also capable of being decent human beings.
At least some of those parts claimed to be owned by the state (currently called 'public property') are the rightful property of those that the state taxes. So to the extent that the taxed would prefer a given immigrant demographic not to use their property state-imposed immigration restrictions with the same outcome are just - effectively partial restitution by the state towards its subjects.
... your property...