Why are borders important?

  • Thread starter Thread starter superrific
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 61
  • Views: 785
  • Politics 

superrific

Inconceivable Member
Messages
3,319
In another thread, CRHeel posted:

"Every country has the right (actually, the responsibility) to control its borders. Illegal immigration is problem just on this concern. Its paramount to be able to monitor who's coming in."

I think this deserves its own thread, because there's a significant philosophical question here. Let's start with the first two words. We would never say that about "Every state." Indeed, states in the US don't have any right to control their borders. Why not? It's in the constitution, but maybe we should change the constitution. Maybe states should put up border crossings and screen people who are coming in. It sure would be a lot more efficient for Texas to open its southern border and close its northern one.

Second, one of the core principles of the EU is "free movement of people." That is, in terms of population movement, European countries are just like U.S. states. Everyone can come and go as they please. So are these countries failing to live up to their responsibilities to control their borders? The UK MAGAs decided they didn't like this so they Brexited and that turned out to be a huge fucking disaster. Sort of like what is going to happen when Trump starts rounding up immigrants. But elsewhere in Europe, the system seems to work pretty well.

It just seems to me that, if you live in North Carolina, your life is more affected by people migrating from Indiana than Mexico. And there's no reason (other than racism) to think that people from Mexico are somehow worse than Hoosiers. Both groups can take your job. Both groups can commit crimes. Both groups can drive up rents by increasing housing demand. Any effect caused by Mexicans can be just as readily caused by Hoosiers.

So maybe we can think about this question. Also if anyone knows the book "Imagined Communities" I'd love to hear thoughts about it. I'm familiar with it but never read it, and it was a long time ago. I don't know how it's aged. But the whole idea is that nations are just that -- imagined communities. It's the idea that for some reason, we think of people as our neighbors and friends even when our lives don't overlap at all because we live hundreds or thousands of miles away.
 
In another thread, CRHeel posted:

"Every country has the right (actually, the responsibility) to control its borders. Illegal immigration is problem just on this concern. Its paramount to be able to monitor who's coming in."

I think this deserves its own thread, because there's a significant philosophical question here. Let's start with the first two words. We would never say that about "Every state." Indeed, states in the US don't have any right to control their borders. Why not? It's in the constitution, but maybe we should change the constitution. Maybe states should put up border crossings and screen people who are coming in. It sure would be a lot more efficient for Texas to open its southern border and close its northern one.

Second, one of the core principles of the EU is "free movement of people." That is, in terms of population movement, European countries are just like U.S. states. Everyone can come and go as they please. So are these countries failing to live up to their responsibilities to control their borders? The UK MAGAs decided they didn't like this so they Brexited and that turned out to be a huge fucking disaster. Sort of like what is going to happen when Trump starts rounding up immigrants. But elsewhere in Europe, the system seems to work pretty well.

It just seems to me that, if you live in North Carolina, your life is more affected by people migrating from Indiana than Mexico. And there's no reason (other than racism) to think that people from Mexico are somehow worse than Hoosiers. Both groups can take your job. Both groups can commit crimes. Both groups can drive up rents by increasing housing demand. Any effect caused by Mexicans can be just as readily caused by Hoosiers.

So maybe we can think about this question. Also if anyone knows the book "Imagined Communities" I'd love to hear thoughts about it. I'm familiar with it but never read it, and it was a long time ago. I don't know how it's aged. But the whole idea is that nations are just that -- imagined communities. It's the idea that for some reason, we think of people as our neighbors and friends even when our lives don't overlap at all because we live hundreds or thousands of miles away.
I didn’t know the border was closed…
 
I think it is because countries invest effort in developing their economy, infrastructure, laws, etc. to serve their people and represent their citizen's shared values.

As a concrete practical example, let's say a country invests heavily in infrastructure paid for by decades of taxes and sweat. Shouldn't they have a say in whether a person who didn't invest in the infrastructure could reap the benefits of it? In addition, if there was no such thing as state borders, people might not ever choose to make investments in the common good.
 
I didn’t know the border was closed…
Oh, dang! That's wild. It's good that you know now. Knowledge is power! Border apprehensions- in other words, border patrol personnel encountering and detaining illegal migrants- is currently at a four-year low dating back to the end of the first Trump presidency. The Biden administration took robust action in 2022 and 2023 (link) to significantly beef up the amount of personnel, technology, and resources that we deploy to the United States-Mexico border. The Biden administration matched and then exceeded the Trump administration's number of deportations of illegal migrants from the United States.

So, now that you have had the myth of an "open border" put comfortably to rest, do us a favor and help to educate others!
 
I think it is because countries invest effort in developing their economy, infrastructure, laws, etc. to serve their people and represent their citizen's shared values.

As a concrete practical example, let's say a country invests heavily in infrastructure paid for by decades of taxes and sweat. Shouldn't they have a say in whether a person who didn't invest in the infrastructure could reap the benefits of it? In addition, if there was no such thing as state borders, people might not ever choose to make investments in the common good.
How does this distinguish Texas' southern border from its northern one?
 
Please don't hijack a philosophical thread with more stupid bullshit about current events. There are other threads for that.

It should be a rule that the thread starter can ask for thread hijackers to exit, and if they don't, they get suspended or banned.
 
In another thread, CRHeel posted:

"Every country has the right (actually, the responsibility) to control its borders. Illegal immigration is problem just on this concern. Its paramount to be able to monitor who's coming in."

I think this deserves its own thread, because there's a significant philosophical question here. Let's start with the first two words. We would never say that about "Every state." Indeed, states in the US don't have any right to control their borders. Why not? It's in the constitution, but maybe we should change the constitution. Maybe states should put up border crossings and screen people who are coming in. It sure would be a lot more efficient for Texas to open its southern border and close its northern one.

Second, one of the core principles of the EU is "free movement of people." That is, in terms of population movement, European countries are just like U.S. states. Everyone can come and go as they please. So are these countries failing to live up to their responsibilities to control their borders? The UK MAGAs decided they didn't like this so they Brexited and that turned out to be a huge fucking disaster. Sort of like what is going to happen when Trump starts rounding up immigrants. But elsewhere in Europe, the system seems to work pretty well.

It just seems to me that, if you live in North Carolina, your life is more affected by people migrating from Indiana than Mexico. And there's no reason (other than racism) to think that people from Mexico are somehow worse than Hoosiers. Both groups can take your job. Both groups can commit crimes. Both groups can drive up rents by increasing housing demand. Any effect caused by Mexicans can be just as readily caused by Hoosiers.

So maybe we can think about this question. Also if anyone knows the book "Imagined Communities" I'd love to hear thoughts about it. I'm familiar with it but never read it, and it was a long time ago. I don't know how it's aged. But the whole idea is that nations are just that -- imagined communities. It's the idea that for some reason, we think of people as our neighbors and friends even when our lives don't overlap at all because we live hundreds or thousands of miles away.
? How would Border crossing work with the States..Main Highway I guess but what about all the backroads in each state going into neighboring states…I live in the NC/VA line and its 100s of roads that go into VA that are off the beaten trail…
 
? How would Border crossing work with the States..Main Highway I guess but what about all the backroads in each state going into neighboring states…I live in the NC/VA line and its 100s of roads that go into VA that are off the beaten trail…
Well, then, maybe NC and VA need to get their act together and police their borders, huh?

Tell me the distinction between that border and the US Mexico border. Why should it be something horrible for a citizen of Juarez to drive into El Paso to do business, whereas we don't bat an eye at Hoos coming into NC and taking our jobs or business opportunities?
 
How does this distinguish Texas' southern border from its northern one?
Well, you definitely have different levels of infrastructure when you go from one state to another. The roads definitely change when you go from Texas to Oklahoma. I don't remember which is worse but I do remember there being a significant difference.

That difference is minor when compared to going from Mexico to Texas. Our states all get funding from the federal government which levels things out to some extent although I would guess that whole paying taxes to the federal government then having them returned to the states is probably something that will be going away soon.

I think you have a point that once we destroy much of our federal government that states will start to look like different countries. Places like Mississippi will probably start to resemble third world countries - and that will be a leopard eating faces moment. But I would argue that if that gets too extreme, there will be more and more momentum towards states seceding.
 
Yes and that is the legal way to enter the country…Am I wrong…
I guess I'm confused by your original question/point- were you not making the point that you believe that the southern border is "wide open"? If not, forgive me- that's one of the more inane talking points that we'e been hearing from the right wing lately, so I may have misunderstood your intent. But I don't want us to further derail the thread topic, which is a philosophical questioning of the importance of national borders, so I'll drop it.
 
Well, then, maybe NC and VA need to get their act together and police their borders, huh?

Tell me the distinction between that border and the US Mexico border. Why should it be something horrible for a citizen of Juarez to drive into El Paso to do business, whereas we don't bat an eye at Hoos coming into NC and taking our jobs or business opportunities?
They can all they need is a valid passport and either a B-1/B-2 visa or a Border Crossing Card (BCC) to legally enter the country for business purposes…
 
I guess I'm confused by your original question/point- were you not making the point that you believe that the southern border is "wide open"? If not, forgive me- that's one of the more inane talking points that we'e been hearing from the right wing lately, so I may have misunderstood your intent. But I don't want us to further derail the thread topic, which is a philosophical questioning of the importance of national borders, so I'll drop it.
Not trying to derail the thread at all just asking questions…
 
Well, then, maybe NC and VA need to get their act together and police their borders, huh?

Tell me the distinction between that border and the US Mexico border. Why should it be something horrible for a citizen of Juarez to drive into El Paso to do business, whereas we don't bat an eye at Hoos coming into NC and taking our jobs or business opportunities?
Also with border crossings for each state wouldn’t this help catch more illegals…You know the ones that travel up and down and all around harvesting the crops that we eat…
 
Back
Top