top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 2 points 4 hours ago

Dumb take since people could travel through both ways visa-free all the way until 2022, even after 2014, during the donbass war, so the invasion was effectively a border closure and a restriction of people's movement.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago

    There's a pretty significant difference between blocking the free movement of people between two polities and the question of which polity controls an area. And I say that even as someone who doesn't care about the second one unless I have a good reason to (beyond just it being a border).

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago
    [–] 30 points 9 hours ago

    "Anyone should be allowed to be in a public park."

    "Oh, so you think there should be areas where people can just kill babies?"

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

    Going there was never a problem, the part where they started killing people and bombing shit is what we take an issue with.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

    If someone I don't like is allowed to go somewhere I don't want them to go, they could start killing people at any moment.

    Also, I am of the view that every single person south of the border that would want to cross north of Mexico is a gang-affiliated serial killer. Every single person coming from East Asia is a spy, a saboteur, or a left-wing extremist intent on destabilizing the country. Every single African coming to the US has Ebola. Every single Muslim coming to the US is going to impose Sharia Law.

    We need to close our borders until I, personally, feel safe. And the TV says I'm not safe. So nobody should be allowed, unless they are white.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 hours ago

    If someone I don’t like is allowed to go somewhere I don’t want them to go, they could start killing people at any moment.

    {insert skinner from ratatouille reading faster}

    every single person {...} that would want to cross north of Mexico is a gang-affiliated serial killer

    {same animation but backwards}

    Good job with the satire, almost got me there.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 15 points 11 hours ago (1 child)

    You can strive for a future state of things where borders aren't necessary, and also condemn the invasion of a nation's right for autonomy in the current state of things.

    The invasion of one country by another is not an action on the same path towards a future where borders don't exist.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 47 points 15 hours ago* (25 children)

    I've spent a lot of time traveling, been to close to 40 countries. A lot of times I had to get a visa. Once to get in Switzerland for two weeks I had to present a lease agreement from a friend there who welcomed me for few nights. Stack of papers I have to the embassy was a finger thick.

    Wholeheartedly and fully wish this whole system to go burst in high flames. One of the fondest memories I have is the first time I came across Polish-Czech border without any controls when both countries joined the Schengen agreement. Or the other time when me and a bunch of friends were strolling in a park in Germany and casually strolled over a bridge into Poland. I did it, like, five times just to enjoy it.

    People who are rooting for closed borders, territory wars, influence - are either not traveling or privileged enough to not see this. Fuck them. I'd rather have a better world for everyone than excellent for selected few.

  • source
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 child)

    I've also travelled and that's why I want borders, at least for now.

    We should definitely be working to raise people in the poorer parts of the world out of poverty. I've been to some developing countries, and life there is extremely hard. That's why so many of them want to move to a rich country where they can live a better life.

    Yeah, as a rich westerner, borders are an annoyance. It's great going around Europe and going from the Netherlands to France without needing a passport or anything.

    Having said that, in the Netherlands and France, and most other western countries, there is a great social safety net paid for by taxes that makes sure that everybody living in those countries can live a decent life. But, even Europe was put under stress by the fact that some countries in the EU have a GDP per capita that's half what it is in other places.

    A fair number of people migrated to richer countries within the EU for a better life. Most found a job and worked. They contributed more to the countries than they received in benefits. Even then, that was hard on those richer countries because it displaced some of the lower-wage workers, or depressed their wages. Despite this, the EU has mostly held together, other than Brexit, and the majority of the UK now regrets Brexit.

    The important thing to remember is that the EU vets members before allowing them in, and was slow to allow the poorer Eastern European countries to join.

    If the world eliminated borders tomorrow, the richer western countries would be swamped by poorer people from developing countries seeking a better life. There's no way that the systems in those countries could cope.

    The rich might love it. Suddenly there would be hundreds or thousands of people competing for the lowest paying jobs, allowing the bosses to offer the lowest possible wages, the worst possible working conditions, etc. The ultra-rich business owners could get rid of unions and get local workers for next to nothing.

    For the slightly less rich, the professional class, it wouldn't be too bad. Their jobs are protected. You need to pass the bar to be a lawyer. You need to do a residency to become a doctor. Their professional associations would continue to do the work necessary so that say a doctor in Nigeria didn't have their credentials recognized in the west.

    The less wealthy you are, the less protected you would be. For someone whose job doesn't require any kind of diploma, certificate or degree, there would be no protection. They'd be competing with every unskilled person who came into the country seeking opportunities.

    Even if you personally think that chaos is a small price to pay for a more fair world, a lot of people don't. The rise of far-right and fascist movements in the west is a direct result of increasing immigration. If borders were eliminated, not only would there be a lot more far-right voters, there would probably be violent clashes, even mass slaughters.

    A lot of people hate globalization, but it has resulted in raising a lot of people in developing countries out of extreme poverty. It has done that mainly by taking wealth and power away from the poorest people in richer countries by shipping their jobs overseas. That part sucks. But, at least a lot of people in developing countries are no longer in danger of dying if they have a bad few weeks.

    Programs like USAID were a better way of doing some of the same things. These were often subsidies for US farmers whose produce was then just donated or sold extremely cheaply to developing countries. There were of course problems with this system too. Often the "farmers" receiving the subsidies were rich corporations. But, it did raise the floor for some of the worst-off people in the world.

    If we can continue to find ways to help people in developing countries, we should do that. Hopefully we can find a better way to do it than we've done in the past. But, even a less-than-ideal solution does help. Eventually, we may be able to reach a point at which we can remove borders without resulting in a mass migration that overwhelms the systems of the richer countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 hours ago* (1 child)

    Your way too long and easily compactable post is a good summary why I'm in support of going full throttle on investment in neighboring countries until their standards of living are up to par.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago

    My post was way too long because it goes against the popular sentiment. If you agree with the popular sentiment, you can afford to have a short post. If you disagree and keep it short, people will downvote you for the things you didn't mention, or will accuse you of not considering X.

    Anyhow, I'm in favour of investing in neighbouring countries, or just donating to them. There are problems with donating some things like food. It helps keep people alive, but it also means farmers take a hit because they're competing with free. But, it's hard to argue when people need food or they'll die. Donating training and skills development is a better path. I know someone who works at an NGO that works with local NGOs to train their leadership to be more effective. I think that's one of the best things I've heard of for helping other countries because it just makes the people living there more effective at what they do. But, it's not a quick process.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 10 hours ago

    Grew up in Texas, and back in the 80s it was very normal for kids to just hop into a car and drive south of the border for Spring Break. This was the most normal thing in the world for hundreds of thousands of teenagers and young adults.

    And then national media realized they could make a lot of cheap news coverage by scandalizing the practice. So we got a slew of news stories, which became inflated with an even more over-dramatized series of books, tv shows, and movies, showing kids going across the border for drug use and rape and animal abuse and to dispose of dead bodies for the cartels and to get eaten alive by the Chupacabra. We got bombarded by a slew of media with a flashlight under the chin whispering "Oh, you think these kids are having fun? Well, what if the news threw a red filter over the images and used graphical effects to imply everyone was murdered?!"

    Both the US and the Mexican police got more and more involved. The borders became militarized. You ended up with these obnoxious traffic situations, which really killed the appeal of any kind of vacationing. Also didn't help that a lot of the popular destinations got enclosed and privatized, for the benefit of a few insider luxury developers. The cost of a vacation exploded, as cruise lines and chain hotels and resorts took over the best spots. And now it's been fully Disney-fied, with a heavily demarcated entry and exit for tourists who are heavily discouraged from mingling with locals.

    Shit fucking sucks, man.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (22 replies)
    [–] 49 points 16 hours ago (8 children)

    The entire Russian war of aggression is about moving lines on a map in the first place. It's a text book example of the stupid shit people start doing precisely because of our obsession with borders.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 70 points 19 hours ago (8 children)

    "Go wherever" doesn't include "kill people, bomb cities and abduct children wherever".

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
    [–] 4 points 12 hours ago

    Like infinity, there are different "everything"s.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›