Kialo requires cookies to work correctly.
Should We Abolish Strict Regulation Over Crossing National Borders?
In pursuit of a globalised world, we should abolish strict regulation of national borders
Open borders would stimulate the economy of the host country
In modern globalized markets capital is free to move, but workers are not. This greatly empowers multinational corporations and imperialist powers to victimize workers in the global south (primarily), and weaken workers right in the developed world.
With the advent of internet proliferation over the world, data and information moves freely between countries. People should be able to do the same.
Individuals do not choose where they are born; it is essentially random. Given this national borders are arbitrary and people should be free to live where they want.
Human rights benefit when people have sufficient mobility relative to goods.
There is a correlation between more immigrants and less crime in the United States.
Strict regulation of national borders is a form of security and protection for nation-states in a globalised world.
A globalized world is a threat to less empowered ethnicities and cultures. It would remove barriers against wealthy societies imposing their values and norms on vulnerable societies.
Powerful governments serve as a bulwark against powerful corporations. While both governments and corporations are necessary social institutions in modern life, borders provide a check on corporate power.
Open borders would further the wealth imbalance among states
Open borders would harm the native population.
Should we abolish political parties in the USA?
Should we buy local over global products?
Should we replace meat with insect derived protein?