6 ms·

Is it paranoia, or just a sensible way for states to implement some semblance of control over their own border when a EU wide strategy seems out of reach?

johannes1234321 8y ago
It is paranoia or rather political acting, since right next to the "controlled" borders there are smaller streets and paths without controlled border and there are multiple reports about those border officers not finding anything of relevance (from time to time they notice something like overloaded cars and those kind of offenses, but that's not a border protection issue, but regular police work)
lucideer 8y ago
It's paranoia. In order to argue that it's sensible, you have to first demonstrate a disimprovement in affairs warranting a change in policy, and secondly show a causal link between "outsiders" that your border control is targeting and those disimprovements. Even if you could manage the former of those two (which I don't believe you could, though I might be mistaken), the latter is definitely not the case.
- Symbiote 8y ago
  I don't have any numbers, but I twice saw refugees "caught" at Malmö Hyllie station; the first station in Sweden and the official customs point for people arriving by train from Denmark. I only go to Malmö every 2-3 months, so at least for a while it may have been reasonable, given the aim of discovering refugees before they settle illegally somewhere.
  - lucideer 8y ago
    I've been to Sweden twice in my life, and I've hit these border checks three times (I believe they were the first country to bring this stuff in—about 5 other countries have done so since) and also seen the same happen on one occasion coming from Copenhagen (by bus); someone being "caught". Nothing about that indicates to me that this is warranted, effective, or not purely motivated by paranoia. Who were those that were "caught" in your encounters? Did you get their names?
jstanley 8y ago
It is no more "sensible" for a state to be exercising control of its border than it is for a town to be exercising control over its border. We're all free people in the world, and we should be able to move around it freely. There should be no borders at all.
- eMSF 8y ago
  Of course it's more sensible. A town doesn't have the same authority as the state. Although it's perhaps hard to see that from so far left of the field.
- jamiegreen 8y ago
  In this world, how would public officials plan for the number of school places needed in 2 years, or the number of hospital beds? It's a nice idea, but it seems impractical. The sentiment that we are "all free people" may sound nice but is unfortunately a meaningless platitude bearing little resemblance to the real world. Sorry if that sounds unduly harsh
  - jstanley 8y ago
    The same way town officials currently plan for the number of school places needed in their town in 2 years. I already drew a parallel between towns and countries. Remember, we're all free to visit or even move to a different town right now, and yet we don't have chaos.
    - HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
      The same way town officials currently plan for the number of school places needed in their town in 2 years. With increased revenue from where, exactly?
- HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
  Are you not then essentially arguing that states have no sovereignty? If so, how far do you take it - do individuals? Can any migrant - legal or not - rock up to your house and start camping on your lawn?

johannes1234321 8y ago

It is paranoia or rather political acting, since right next to the "controlled" borders there are smaller streets and paths without controlled border and there are multiple reports about those border officers not finding anything of relevance (from time to time they notice something like overloaded cars and those kind of offenses, but that's not a border protection issue, but regular police work)

lucideer 8y ago

It's paranoia. In order to argue that it's sensible, you have to first demonstrate a disimprovement in affairs warranting a change in policy, and secondly show a causal link between "outsiders" that your border control is targeting and those disimprovements. Even if you could manage the former of those two (which I don't believe you could, though I might be mistaken), the latter is definitely not the case.

Symbiote 8y ago
I don't have any numbers, but I twice saw refugees "caught" at Malmö Hyllie station; the first station in Sweden and the official customs point for people arriving by train from Denmark. I only go to Malmö every 2-3 months, so at least for a while it may have been reasonable, given the aim of discovering refugees before they settle illegally somewhere.
- lucideer 8y ago
  I've been to Sweden twice in my life, and I've hit these border checks three times (I believe they were the first country to bring this stuff in—about 5 other countries have done so since) and also seen the same happen on one occasion coming from Copenhagen (by bus); someone being "caught". Nothing about that indicates to me that this is warranted, effective, or not purely motivated by paranoia. Who were those that were "caught" in your encounters? Did you get their names?

jstanley 8y ago

It is no more "sensible" for a state to be exercising control of its border than it is for a town to be exercising control over its border. We're all free people in the world, and we should be able to move around it freely. There should be no borders at all.

eMSF 8y ago
Of course it's more sensible. A town doesn't have the same authority as the state. Although it's perhaps hard to see that from so far left of the field.
jamiegreen 8y ago
In this world, how would public officials plan for the number of school places needed in 2 years, or the number of hospital beds? It's a nice idea, but it seems impractical. The sentiment that we are "all free people" may sound nice but is unfortunately a meaningless platitude bearing little resemblance to the real world. Sorry if that sounds unduly harsh
- jstanley 8y ago
  The same way town officials currently plan for the number of school places needed in their town in 2 years. I already drew a parallel between towns and countries. Remember, we're all free to visit or even move to a different town right now, and yet we don't have chaos.
  - HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
    The same way town officials currently plan for the number of school places needed in their town in 2 years. With increased revenue from where, exactly?
HumanDrivenDev 8y ago
Are you not then essentially arguing that states have no sovereignty? If so, how far do you take it - do individuals? Can any migrant - legal or not - rock up to your house and start camping on your lawn?