3 ms·

So citizenship is yet another contract - between an individual and a society. To eliminate the unfairness of lottery, changing citizenships should be as easy as

by zerr 1mo ago

So citizenship is yet another contract - between an individual and a society. To eliminate the unfairness of lottery, changing citizenships should be as easy as changing jobs.

happytoexplain 1mo ago
>changing citizenships should be as easy as changing jobs Even removing legal barriers, it can't be as easy, since changing citizenships necessitates a very large geographical move, while changing jobs may a require a large move, a small move, or no move. Changing countries changes your entire life - you are leaving your home, its culture, and everybody you know there. It's cruel to imply the people who would be made miserable by such changes simply don't matter.
- zerr 1mo ago
  The point is to eliminate the birth lottery - so if you happen to be born in a bad place, moving to a better place should be just a matter of your wish.
samrus 1mo ago
No becuase citizenship implies deep cultural and philosophical values as well. You cant switch those that quickly Another reason is that the responsibilities between citizen and society are fulfilled on a long timescale. A society will educate you, and then you need to contribute to the economy in that society to pay it back so to speak. Technological innovation, military service, rasing future citizens. Any of these things can only happen on a long timescale so quickly switching citizenship doesnt allow that contract to be fulfilled
- zerr 1mo ago
  > No becuase citizenship implies deep cultural and philosophical values as well. If that was the case, most existing citizens would lose their status :) > You cant switch those that quickly It is much faster with the globalization and youtube-ization. After all, "We all live in Amerika". Btw, the notion of what we call today a citizenship arose just at late 18th century. So, it's not something fundamental that has always been there.
  - happytoexplain 1mo ago
    This is "gotcha" style internet trolling. It doesn't belong on HN. To be specific, for clarity: "Most" is a dishonest word in this context, and regardless the parent did not imply a legal distinction. As for definition: First, nobody here is necessarily using the word by some specific definition invented at a particular time, but rather in the colloquial sense of being a member of a country; and second, even if they were restricting the sense of the word to the one you are referring to, recency (if that's what you're implying by "18th century"...?) does not imply some kind of triviality.
    - zerr 1mo ago
      Self-assigned moderation doesn't belong to HN. Also, considering the wide cultural background of the userbase. I have no idea what's your "gotcha" style means. Neither your explanation helps. As for the specific wording, replace "Most" with "Many", the point still stands. Again, please refrain from moderation and silencing attempts. Thank you.

by zerr 1mo ago

So citizenship is yet another contract - between an individual and a society. To eliminate the unfairness of lottery, changing citizenships should be as easy as changing jobs.

happytoexplain 1mo ago

>changing citizenships should be as easy as changing jobs Even removing legal barriers, it can't be as easy, since changing citizenships necessitates a very large geographical move, while changing jobs may a require a large move, a small move, or no move. Changing countries changes your entire life - you are leaving your home, its culture, and everybody you know there. It's cruel to imply the people who would be made miserable by such changes simply don't matter.

zerr 1mo ago
The point is to eliminate the birth lottery - so if you happen to be born in a bad place, moving to a better place should be just a matter of your wish.

samrus 1mo ago

No becuase citizenship implies deep cultural and philosophical values as well. You cant switch those that quickly Another reason is that the responsibilities between citizen and society are fulfilled on a long timescale. A society will educate you, and then you need to contribute to the economy in that society to pay it back so to speak. Technological innovation, military service, rasing future citizens. Any of these things can only happen on a long timescale so quickly switching citizenship doesnt allow that contract to be fulfilled

zerr 1mo ago
> No becuase citizenship implies deep cultural and philosophical values as well. If that was the case, most existing citizens would lose their status :) > You cant switch those that quickly It is much faster with the globalization and youtube-ization. After all, "We all live in Amerika". Btw, the notion of what we call today a citizenship arose just at late 18th century. So, it's not something fundamental that has always been there.
- happytoexplain 1mo ago
  This is "gotcha" style internet trolling. It doesn't belong on HN. To be specific, for clarity: "Most" is a dishonest word in this context, and regardless the parent did not imply a legal distinction. As for definition: First, nobody here is necessarily using the word by some specific definition invented at a particular time, but rather in the colloquial sense of being a member of a country; and second, even if they were restricting the sense of the word to the one you are referring to, recency (if that's what you're implying by "18th century"...?) does not imply some kind of triviality.
  - zerr 1mo ago
    Self-assigned moderation doesn't belong to HN. Also, considering the wide cultural background of the userbase. I have no idea what's your "gotcha" style means. Neither your explanation helps. As for the specific wording, replace "Most" with "Many", the point still stands. Again, please refrain from moderation and silencing attempts. Thank you.