5 ms·

All countries have border policy including yours, this isn’t about Europe, or about Africa. Why do you assume border policy is xenophobia, and not, say, logisti

by dahart 2y ago

All countries have border policy including yours, this isn’t about Europe, or about Africa. Why do you assume border policy is xenophobia, and not, say, logistics and resource and tax management? Why would you jump to a conclusion this has more to do with race than with money or stopping crime?

immibis 2y ago
If it's logistics and resources and tax management, why doesn't it apply between cities?
- kmeisthax 2y ago
  Furthermore, why aren't efforts being made to fix those problems to make mass migration from more countries viable? The existence of an emergency situation that justifies an authoritarian solution does not absolve the state from its responsibility to take action to prevent that situation from happening.
  - dahart 2y ago
    What is the problem, exactly? What responsibility, exactly, does the state have to make mass migration viable? It seems like you’re making really big assumptions. Make a list of the costs and benefits for both too lax and too strict borders for all the countries your ideas should apply to. Account for the costs and benefits of both incoming residents and outgoing residents, both from the point of view of the people moving, and from the point of view of the state. How would you balance lax borders against the downsides like weapons, drugs, human trafficking, and other criminal activity? Would you do anything to control the flow of too many people at once to places where there is no housing or utilities for them? Would you do anything to stabilize the economies of countries that lose or gain too many people in a short period of time? What do you propose for settling disputes about the border policy? If other people in your country don’t agree with your idea, how should the policy be decided? What would you say if you found out that the majority of people in the country you live in want strict borders, and vote for them?
    - immibis 2y ago
      The state has a responsibility to keep people happy. If states keep people sad, we should abolish them because they have no good purpose. Borders don't keep people happy.
      - dahart 2y ago
        Very telling that you didn’t address a single one of my questions… Pls see Chesterton’s Fence. If you think borders serve no good purpose and that nobody is happy about them, it’s because you’re ignorant about borders and haven’t bothered to read anything or think about it at all. Lots of people want borders, and for better or worse, lots of people are happy about them, which is why they are there. You don’t get to take borders down until you understand and acknowledge the reasons they were put up. Which state are we discussing? Can you point to a legal document or constitution for a country that defines the state’s purpose as keeping people happy? Maybe one exists, but I’ve never heard of that anywhere. I think in most countries, it’s your own responsibility to keep yourself happy. A lot of countries will, however, try to keep it’s citizens safe and try to protect the economy, and borders are seen as one of the tools to help meet those ends.
- dahart 2y ago
  I think some cities in the world do have borders with ID checks. Which cities are we talking about, specifically? In the US there are state borders that (edit: may) require ID checks. This is true in other countries too. And as others pointed out, you can’t cross private property boundaries in many locales either, whether it’s backyards or corporate property. I can certainly think of several reasons why city border can and should be less restrictive than country borders, but I would first turn the question back to you, since your question involves unstated assumptions: why should it apply between cities? And then think about it carefully and see if you can imagine some reasons for why things are they way they are. A really big hint: think economics. FWIW, the questions in this thread seem to be somewhat ignorant of history and global politics and economics. This stuff has been debated and written about ad nauseum, you can for sure find tons of material explaining how various countries/states/cities arrived at their border policies if you’re actually curious about it. I’m certainly no expert on it, so if your question is serious, please research the answer rather than wait for someone on HN to tell you. The other thing your question implies, and others here are failing to acknowledge is the practical realities of the tradeoffs involved. There isn’t some perfect solution, that does not exist. This is an area of government that comes with both advantages and disadvantages no matter what policy is chosen. The goals are usually to balance the costs against the benefits. Assuming that lax borders is the answer is almost certainly the wrong answer. But, there are huge teams of smart people in every country who’ve studied and dealt with the logistics and legalities of policing borders. Sometimes there are brash politicians who dictate bad policy over the objections of many, but even so, to me it’s always absolutely wild to see armchair internet critics assume they know better and that obvious things have been completely missed. If you do think it can be improved and feel strongly, get involved!
  - hollerith 2y ago
    >In the US there are state borders that require ID checks. This is quite surprising. Was this a COVID measure? Specifics please.
    - dahart 2y ago
      No, some states have had border checks for things like animals and produce/fruit (to prevent the spread of some diseases), among other things, for many decades. The California border is the one I’ve run into most often. They don’t always ask for ID, I misstated that, but there is a stop and they can scan license plates and look for suspicious activity.

by dahart 2y ago

immibis 2y ago

If it's logistics and resources and tax management, why doesn't it apply between cities?

kmeisthax 2y ago
Furthermore, why aren't efforts being made to fix those problems to make mass migration from more countries viable? The existence of an emergency situation that justifies an authoritarian solution does not absolve the state from its responsibility to take action to prevent that situation from happening.
- dahart 2y ago
  What is the problem, exactly? What responsibility, exactly, does the state have to make mass migration viable? It seems like you’re making really big assumptions. Make a list of the costs and benefits for both too lax and too strict borders for all the countries your ideas should apply to. Account for the costs and benefits of both incoming residents and outgoing residents, both from the point of view of the people moving, and from the point of view of the state. How would you balance lax borders against the downsides like weapons, drugs, human trafficking, and other criminal activity? Would you do anything to control the flow of too many people at once to places where there is no housing or utilities for them? Would you do anything to stabilize the economies of countries that lose or gain too many people in a short period of time? What do you propose for settling disputes about the border policy? If other people in your country don’t agree with your idea, how should the policy be decided? What would you say if you found out that the majority of people in the country you live in want strict borders, and vote for them?
  - immibis 2y ago
    The state has a responsibility to keep people happy. If states keep people sad, we should abolish them because they have no good purpose. Borders don't keep people happy.
    - dahart 2y ago
      Very telling that you didn’t address a single one of my questions… Pls see Chesterton’s Fence. If you think borders serve no good purpose and that nobody is happy about them, it’s because you’re ignorant about borders and haven’t bothered to read anything or think about it at all. Lots of people want borders, and for better or worse, lots of people are happy about them, which is why they are there. You don’t get to take borders down until you understand and acknowledge the reasons they were put up. Which state are we discussing? Can you point to a legal document or constitution for a country that defines the state’s purpose as keeping people happy? Maybe one exists, but I’ve never heard of that anywhere. I think in most countries, it’s your own responsibility to keep yourself happy. A lot of countries will, however, try to keep it’s citizens safe and try to protect the economy, and borders are seen as one of the tools to help meet those ends.
dahart 2y ago
I think some cities in the world do have borders with ID checks. Which cities are we talking about, specifically? In the US there are state borders that (edit: may) require ID checks. This is true in other countries too. And as others pointed out, you can’t cross private property boundaries in many locales either, whether it’s backyards or corporate property. I can certainly think of several reasons why city border can and should be less restrictive than country borders, but I would first turn the question back to you, since your question involves unstated assumptions: why should it apply between cities? And then think about it carefully and see if you can imagine some reasons for why things are they way they are. A really big hint: think economics. FWIW, the questions in this thread seem to be somewhat ignorant of history and global politics and economics. This stuff has been debated and written about ad nauseum, you can for sure find tons of material explaining how various countries/states/cities arrived at their border policies if you’re actually curious about it. I’m certainly no expert on it, so if your question is serious, please research the answer rather than wait for someone on HN to tell you. The other thing your question implies, and others here are failing to acknowledge is the practical realities of the tradeoffs involved. There isn’t some perfect solution, that does not exist. This is an area of government that comes with both advantages and disadvantages no matter what policy is chosen. The goals are usually to balance the costs against the benefits. Assuming that lax borders is the answer is almost certainly the wrong answer. But, there are huge teams of smart people in every country who’ve studied and dealt with the logistics and legalities of policing borders. Sometimes there are brash politicians who dictate bad policy over the objections of many, but even so, to me it’s always absolutely wild to see armchair internet critics assume they know better and that obvious things have been completely missed. If you do think it can be improved and feel strongly, get involved!
- hollerith 2y ago
  >In the US there are state borders that require ID checks. This is quite surprising. Was this a COVID measure? Specifics please.
  - dahart 2y ago
    No, some states have had border checks for things like animals and produce/fruit (to prevent the spread of some diseases), among other things, for many decades. The California border is the one I’ve run into most often. They don’t always ask for ID, I misstated that, but there is a stop and they can scan license plates and look for suspicious activity.