3 ms·
My point is that none of those arguments have anything about them that makes them specific to nations. For example 2a could equally be said by someone in London
by OscarCunningham 7y ago
My point is that none of those arguments have anything about them that makes them specific to nations. For example 2a could equally be said by someone in London about immigration from the North.
Why do we let these arguments have force at the national level but ignore them at subnational and supernational levels?
- cja 7y ago"Why do we let these arguments have force at the national level but ignore them at subnational and supernational levels?" Because nations already exist and are they are accepted. Sometimes their borders are accepted too. Around 2015 I had a conversation with a Slovenian who told me that if I didn't like the new population density in my city then I could move to Wales. It's unlikely that I would be allowed to build a wall around Worcester or that London would be allowed to create a high tech system for identifying, catching and repatriating northerners. (Although a Chinese-style social credit system might work.)