7 ms·

I don't give away my right to object when a black army moves into my neighborhood on the pretense of just wanting a better life. And yet I do demand strong evid

• Banthum 9y ago
  Other people you live with don't want to accept a homeless person into the home. And, you are part of a social contract between these other people you live with (e.g. your countrymen) where you can't just override them. If you had your own country where nobody else lived, where you had no social contract with anyone, it would be fine for you to let anyone in (of course, you wouldn't have a country for long).
  • an_cap 9y ago
    Other white people in my neighborhood don't want to accept a black person into the neighborhood. And, I am part of a social contract between these other people I live with (e.g. by fellow neighbors) where I can't just override them. If you respond by saying that the social contract of the country (which bans discrimination based on race) supercedes the social contract of my neighborhood then I'll say that the social contract of the world supercedes even that.
    • Banthum 9y ago
      Except... there is no social contract of the world, and never has been. You're imagining a global social contract because it makes you feel good. Pure wishful thinking. In reality, nobody in India or Africa believes they have any responsibility to you in the slightest. They would gladly loot everything you have without the slightest concern for your rights. So it is with perhaps 85% of the world population (e.g. the part outside the West). If they feel themselves to have no responsibility for you whatever, there is no contract, because contracts have two sides.
• SilasX 9y ago
  >I don't give away my right to object when a black army moves into my neighborhood on the pretense of just wanting a better life. And yet I do demand strong evidence that this is a likely scenario before essentially banning black people from my neighborhood. People moving into your neighborhood to conduct a violent overthrow is not a risk because the national borders have already filtered out people who could draw in a bottomless resources from a foreign power. And you can in fact form neighborhood orgs that restrict who can move there. If anything, you have fewer rights to filter it by race than in an ancap world. >The correct analogy is not that you're being forced to accept a homeless person into your property. Its that if I want to accept a homeless person into my property, you shouldn't be allowed to prevent me from doing so. Unless you make a convincing case that they're going to invade you. Which I don't think you have. Sure, admittance to your neighborhood is not admittance to any one person's house. But it is admittance to the public part of it and whoever lets them in. Allowing a foreign army to fill up your country without impediment until their first overt acts is still pretty questionable. But then, once you see why an "immigration policy" against that attack vector is justified, you have to accept the whole regime necessary for trivial permutations of that plan, like rate throttling, a requirement to assimilate, etc.