Because intra-nation migration restrictionism is an evil nasty thing only the communists do? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propiska_in_the_Soviet_Union …
-
-
This idea is expanded on in my essay "The Heat Death of Humanity: Progressivism as the Second Law of Thermodynamics"https://athousandnations.com/2015/02/23/the-heat-death-of-humanity-progressivism-as-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics/ …
-
I'll read this, thanks! Feel free to tell me "read the essay first" but my next question is, without completely open or closed borders, you run into a need to optimize the level of permeability. (For example, skills-tested immigration.) What's the best way to empirically balance
-
...the economic gains from freedom of trade and movement versus the QOL and civic downsides of weakening cultural cohesion?
-
There's no simple answer to a question like this where goals vary and the underlying causal functions are poorly understood. Fortunately, I have a meta-answer: a diverse industry of competing city-states will discover good sets of tradeoffs. It's engineering, not philosophy.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I feel like this doesn't account for how provinces, cities, and towns maintain their selfness and systems without formal borders.
-
By border I mean an enforced demarcation of difference. Not necessarily "None shall pass." All borders have some permeability (except maybe black hole event horizon?). Provinces, cities, towns have a legal boundary which permits legal diversity.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
please note that the no border network is (generally speaking) an *anti-globalization* platform.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.