that as humans and being born on earth, we should be allowed to move anywhere on the earth for as much time as we want and the idea of countries is stupid? since this is "our" planet and countries are artificial borders created by man?
would you agree or no?
and this is just general philosophy
In general your idea is great!!!
But it will be problem for the security people. Without restriction they cannot have control in large. Problem in law and order section has to be taken in to consideration.
It would be nice if there was no need for tribes and countries, but not a realistic thing to hope for. The simple fact is that all people are not nice. When you wander near them with cooler stuff than they have, they want it, and your life is meaningless to them, so why not kill you and take it? Tribalism is the natural state of humanity; be nice to those within the tribe, but everyone else is fair game and not quite human. Raping a woman of the tribe is a capital crime, but raping a semi-human woman of the other is a virtuous act. Etc. If not for the concept of nations there would be no travel, because crossing into another tribe's territory would be a death sentence. Still is in some parts of the world.
Pure philosophy has it's place in the world: the hothouse of the university. In the world outside the practicalities will intrude. To create a world where you could travel everywhere, you would first have to subdue all tribal and national passions throughout the world, and so far nobody has managed it. Even within the university garden tribal passions are rampant; just invite Ann Coulter or David Horowitz onto a campus and you'll see tribal hatred first hand from supposedly open-minded diversity-loving tolerant studentsmove time around the world and their peace-and-love preaching professors. I reckon the place to start is in the university; first subdue the primal tribalism of those who cannot abide differences of opinion, and once that has been defeated in all universities then the harder hatreds can be encountered, Israel/Arab World, Korea/Japan, Tibet/China, Argentina/Chile, etc. And then once all the nations have agreed to bury the old hatreds we can get started on the tribes and religions. Turks/Armenians, Bosnian Serbs/Muslims, Palestinians/Druzes, Egyptian Muslims/Copts, Hutus/Tutsis etc.
It's a tall order. I reckon just trying to get a pack of university students to listen politely to Ann Coulter and then argue urbanely with anything silly she says is too tall an order for anyone. Tribalism is here to stay until Christ comes back and subdues all things beneath His feet. I think it'll require that level of divine intervention, we humans aren't about to suddenly cease being human.
I agree, and for the most part we can. There are few countries that we are not allowed to go to if we care to do so. The idea of countries is just a manifestation of regional ideas and beliefs based on instinctual human desire, and also, in saying that, I would also like to point out that life in a world without countries is an overall bad idea. Although it seems that with all the war and countless other global epidemics, that if we were one huge happy mass of people living together under the laws of the feudal system then we would suddenly be able to go wherever we would like. This is not the case. Without countries, everything would be the same, just with a lot more chaos, and a lot less organization. It is not government, or other diplomatic matters that distinguish a country, bumove time around the worldt rather, it is the people that inhabit the country which make it what it is.
Yes. The idea of boundaries is man made, and I don't believe that it is necessary.
Well, there are two sides to this argument.
On one hand, yes. This Earth is naturally ours, and technically no one has actual authority over us because we are all made equal by the hands of God. So we should be able to go to Pakistan if we want to and we don't owe the country anything.
But on the less hypothetical hand, you have to realize that there are certain areas that belong to governments and if they don't want to let you in because they think that you can endanger their country, then you can't go in.
Personally, I can't decide on this one, so take your pick....
Philosophically you are the ultimate authority over what you do and there is no rule that says you MUST obey the rules. However, if you don't obery then you carry the full responsibility of your actions and must accept the consequences. By nature man is territorial. The history of the world is rich with migrations that have spawned conflict, fratricide and genocide. Man also ultimately strives for happiness which is only widely possible in times of peace. Borders essentially help keep the peace, so they are a good thing in that respect, but we all know they are also used for very negative reasons having to do with power, control and greed. Philosophically a borderless planet sounds great, but in practical terms it would be untenable.
I think that we should. I would love to see where my money is going.
Governments are supposed to be for the benefit of the people. When govt's become a hindrance rather than a help, they should be modified or abolished.
No comments:
Post a Comment