No Borders..could this be possible?

[Bammx2]

At one time,our ancestors could travel anywhere in the world without all this hassle of "bio-this", "passport-that" a finger print here, a finger print there,here a finger print,there a fin.....sorry.that mcdonald thing keeps getting in the way.

But...they never had to provide finacial proof of anything or length of residencey...etc..

I know we won't see this in our life time,but do you think it could ever happen again?
and what do you think it would take to accomplish it?
I ab-so-lut-ley refuse to believe its impossible!

could education of future generations be the answer?
..............?????????

 

[arnisador]

I think it's inevitable...in the very, very looooooooong run.

 

[Bammx2]

Ok...
let me ask this....

Why do we have "borders" in the first place?
Why were they set up?
To keep the "bad people" out? Keep the good people under contol? or "protected"?
Take the US and Canada.....
To be honest,I, personally(and I am NOT speaking for anyone else!) have ever heard another US citizen complain about being compared to the Canadians.(I have heard it the other way round

) But all in all...we are not going to war with them...probably ever!
So why do we have a border? Why all this hassle?
Would it because some else has dtermined whats best for "us" without asking?

 

[mj_lover]

well, it would be nice not to have to deal with borders, but the fact is, people want to belong to a individual identity (country) national pride, all that fun stuff, it wouldn't exist if everyone was under the same flag.

 

[Bammx2]

well, it would be nice not to have to deal with borders, but the fact is, people want to belong to a individual identity (country) national pride, all that fun stuff, it wouldn't exist if everyone was under the same flag.

I agree.
But I am not asking why people don't give up thier "tribal" identity.
I'm asking what the real reason is as to why we can't travel freely without a bunch of beurocratic red tape?
Throwing up 9/11 and terrorism is not a valid arguement.
These things have been in place loooooong before that was even thought of.
I am true to my "tribe" (so to speak) even though I live elsewhere.
But is the price of patriotism "access denial" to the rest of the world?

 

[mj_lover]

i think it is, beacause one "tribe" doesn't want to let randon other people into its circle. logically it doesn't make to much sense anymore as stated eleswhere if somone want to get in, they will. its all a mentality, "this is ours" ask before you use sort of thing

 

[Andrew Green]

Throwing up 9/11 and terrorism is not a valid arguement.

Might even be that in this case the solution was just more of the cause...

Borders divide people based on who controls them. Which King / Emporer / War lord had conquered the area most recently? That was who controlled the land.

Borders also form around religion, not as much in the west anymore, but they did. Compare the Christian world vs Islam several hundred years ago...

There are three ways which we could go borderless:

A Really big bad event destroys much of our civilization and all the goverments collapse, of course they will likely rebuild....

One nation conquers the world, but conquered people are rarely content so this would likely mean a few generations of military control...

All the nations unite, some efforts towards this seem to have begun. NAFTA, EU, etc. But until the US starts playing nice in these sorts of agreements that will be difficult as they are a rather large super power...

 

[OUMoose]

I believe it could happen one day, when people realize this "global community" is more than just the web. Until then, we will have people clinging to ethnocentric ideas like patriotism and nationalism.

 

[MA-Caver]

I agree.
But I am not asking why people don't give up thier "tribal" identity.
I'm asking what the real reason is as to why we can't travel freely without a bunch of beurocratic red tape?
Throwing up 9/11 and terrorism is not a valid arguement.
These things have been in place loooooong before that was even thought of.
I am true to my "tribe" (so to speak) even though I live elsewhere.
But is the price of patriotism "access denial" to the rest of the world?

You're right "throwing up 9/11 and terrorism is NOT a valid argument" but adding in North/South Vietnam/Korea, World Wars I & II, Spanish American War, Mexican American Wars, Civil Wars of this and dozens of other countries past present and future, so on and so on. Gotta have SOME reason to fight over something and land was one of them... it also helped define battlefronts. "are we in France yet?"
In the book "Story of B" (by Daniel Quinn) lies a good explaination of our past tribal roots, partially when man developed agriculture the need to separate land set aside for this crop and that came up. People/man/humankind settled from nomadic wanderings of the hunter-gatherers of old. Not having borders will arise the idea that any land is anyone's. I think it's instinctive, marking territorial boundries. Why do so many of us (who are home-owners) have fences in our front/backyards? Right, to keep the neighbor's damned dog from laying landmines for us to step in when we can step in our own dog's mines. :lol:
I think that the elimination of borders is not a good idea. The need to travel without passports, identification is also not a good idea. Passage should be a heck of a lot easier without all the hassel of check-points and all that. But until the world as a whole learns to trust itself it's something that we will have to put up with. Call it... a necessary evil.

 

[Andrew Green]

But until the world as a whole learns to trust itself it's something that we will have to put up with. Call it... a necessary evil.

It's hard to learn to trust when you are bunkered in with guns pointing out, more likely you'll build up more mistrust.

So what we have here is a bit of a circle.

 

[heretic888]

I think it's inevitable...in the very, very looooooooong run.

I'm in agreement with arnisador here.

This romanticized time of "no borders" that everyone is eulogizing was a period in humanity's collective development were the vast majority of cultures were nomadic, foraging groups. There's no point in establishing borders when all you do is wander around, scavenging for food.

The "borders" were established in large part with the rise of the agrarian communities, which were sedentary and encompassed much larger populations.

Everything happens in a context.

 

[Adept]

At one time,our ancestors could travel anywhere in the world without all this hassle of "bio-this", "passport-that" a finger print here, a finger print there,here a finger print,there a fin.....sorry.that mcdonald thing keeps getting in the way.

But...they never had to provide finacial proof of anything or length of residencey...etc..

I know we won't see this in our life time,but do you think it could ever happen again?
and what do you think it would take to accomplish it?
I ab-so-lut-ley refuse to believe its impossible!

could education of future generations be the answer?
..............?????????

Well, it depends. Right from the get-go, people had borders and boundaries, and criteria that we wanted people to meet before we let them across. We didn't let just anyone into the cave back in the stone ages.

All thats happened is our criteria for allowing passage have changed, as has our ability to measure said criteria.

Borders will only be un-neccesary when everyone is completely identical. Which, needless to say, doesn't look likely.

 

[heretic888]

Right from the get-go, people had borders and boundaries, and criteria that we wanted people to meet before we let them across. We didn't let just anyone into the cave back in the stone ages.

Ummm... no, actually.

The earliest "human" (or even proto-"human") societies were foraging cultures. Part and parcel to the foraging lifestyle is that you and your community wander to wherever the food is. You don't have a rigidly fixed, preset "territory".

What you are referring to is the rise of sedentary, agriculturally-based communities. Relatively speaking, this is a rather recent development in collective human history, coming about no more than 20,000 years ago.

"Humans" of one form or another had been foraging for hundreds of millenia before then.

 

[Shaolinwind]

At one time,our ancestors could travel anywhere in the world without all this hassle of "bio-this", "passport-that" a finger print here, a finger print there,here a finger print,there a fin.....sorry.that mcdonald thing keeps getting in the way.

But...they never had to provide finacial proof of anything or length of residencey...etc..

I know we won't see this in our life time,but do you think it could ever happen again?
and what do you think it would take to accomplish it?
I ab-so-lut-ley refuse to believe its impossible!

could education of future generations be the answer?
..............?????????

I'm too generally misanthropic to think it's going to ever get anything but worse.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

Currently in the European Union passports are no longer required to move from country to country. As the world shrinks with increasing transportation improvements, a global commodity market, and whatnot...the borders will disappear.

We probably won't live to see it.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Bill Lear]

Ummm... no, actually.

The earliest "human" (or even proto-"human") societies were foraging cultures. Part and parcel to the foraging lifestyle is that you and your community wander to wherever the food is. You don't have a rigidly fixed, preset "territory".

What you are referring to is the rise of sedentary, agriculturally-based communities. Relatively speaking, this is a rather recent development in collective human history, coming about no more than 20,000 years ago.

"Humans" of one form or another had been foraging for hundreds of millenia before then.

Maybe our primitive ancestors didn't have borders, but you cannot deny the fact that human beings have always been territorial in some way, shape, form. No they didn't stay in one precise place for too long or draft primitive constitutions, but they probably did have unspoken rules of some kind.

I would say that even then there was a criteria for fitting into a certain group, tribe, or clan. If an individual had a problem with making others in the group mad (i.e. stealing, bullying, or plain 'ol looking funny) the powers that were probably kicked that individual out of the clan. I'd even venture to say that it would have probably been a violent if not deadly a$$ kicking too.

Just a thought.

:idunno:

 

[heretic888]

Maybe our primitive ancestors didn't have borders, but you cannot deny the fact that human beings have always been territorial in some way, shape, form. No they didn't stay in one precise place for too long or draft primitive constitutions, but they probably did have unspoken rules of some kind.

Sure.

But, we're not talking about "territorialism". We're talking about "borders".

Humans haven't always had borders. They were, however, a natural part of sedentary communities, and we'd do well to retain them. Honestly, would you want just anyone to hop-skip into your nation without any ID or background check?? Terrorists?? Murderers?? Slave-marketers?? Child molesters??

Seriously, now...

 

[Bill Lear]

Sure.

But, we're not talking about "territorialism". We're talking about "borders".

Humans haven't always had borders. They were, however, a natural part of sedentary communities, and we'd do well to retain them. Honestly, would you want just anyone to hop-skip into your nation without any ID or background check?? Terrorists?? Murderers?? Slave-marketers?? Child molesters??

Seriously, now...

I'm totally with you on maintaining our borders. As for the wonderful, good, wholesome people you mentioned on your list... I'd give them one trial, one appeal, and a firing squad. But, that's a topic for a different discussion.

 

[Adept]

Ummm... no, actually.

The earliest "human" (or even proto-"human") societies were foraging cultures. Part and parcel to the foraging lifestyle is that you and your community wander to wherever the food is. You don't have a rigidly fixed, preset "territory".

What you are referring to is the rise of sedentary, agriculturally-based communities.

Well, actually no. What I am referring to is the concept of personal space. The boundaries we throw up around ourselves in order to minimise potential harm. Obviously a nomadic tribe or family group has no 'territory' in the traditional sense. But I'd bet London to a brick that they wouldn't let an aggressive stranger sit at their fire and take their food.

We allways have boundaries, of one sort or another. And we always have criteria we want met before we let people across them.

 

[Kane]

In my opinion certain parts of the Earth should unite. I think Europe should unite into a country like the US and each country should be a state. I know many people frown on the European Union, but I think it is good for a region of small countries to unite. Just my opinion. I am not saying that the world should unite into one coountry, but honestly today there are to many countries.