Bitcoin Forum

This political ideology is gaining a lot of supporters. I need to understand the advantages and problems that such a world conception carry. I would like to know why some support and what would some gain of it and what would other lose. Thank you in advance, my aim is to have an open minded honnest discussion on the topic.

My current understanding, i hope that you wil be able to enlighten me on other perspectives and facts i don't see.

Positive i guess that the ideal of universal right to establish oneself where ever is interesting. Increase mobility opportunity, job seeking and competition opportunity, a more diverse cultural field and less restrictions.

Negative, i see that most breed like invasive species, slums and unsanitary living conditions expanding, security risks, the loss of cultural homogenity, most third world places got there because of their values what would prevent them to impose those everywhere they get dominance, the overcrowding of civilised places, lack of infrastructure and living spaces, the drop of job wages, the collapse of social and public services, the spread of roamers and bandits tribes.

Your turn...

Btw 5billions people have less average income than mexicans... it's a lot.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2017/03/28/20170401_map1.jpg

I dont understand the need to preserve cultural homogenity. No cultures exist in a vacuum; and most cultures are smart enough to assimilate best practice/, most efficient methods from the culture it hosts (music, cuisine, language conventions, even fashion).  And out groups have no problem maintaining their culture when they are abroad, they cluster into communities to reinforce the parts of their culture they wish to keep.

So why do certain populist leaning politics have an appeal? Surely it's obvious that homogenity results in stagnation. Rather than stand alone, participate in the evolution of the whole.

I am all for a one world order/government. Good points so far.

I would argue that the people living in 3rd world countries would not migrate westward. Instead what would happen is development in their countries by the world's corporations. Why would they leave when they would have jobs building on their own land and cities.

As for bandits and thieves, well where is all the military spending going to go? I'm sure there will be some military to deal with terrorists but all that money that was being spent on military can now be used to stop crime.

The negatives you identify are totally accurate. However the people that are biggest supporters of this ideology don't think about these sort of negative consequences. The supporters believe in utopia and being citizens of the world. The reality is that this existed in this world, thousands of years ago in the earliest days of Man. And then some people got greedy and started claiming land as their own, killing people that walked through their land, and offering some food and land right payments to those (poorer people) who couldn't fend for themselves or preferred the protection of the local Lord of the Land. This turned into implementing more order and formality and government which turned into Countries.

I think the idea of no borders and being citizens of the world, all of us, is a great idea. But it requires that we all (billions of us) agree to the same set of rules and respect for other people...and punishment when people violate the rules. What does that sound like? Government.

That is a good description of the problem, except for one thing.

"The same set of rules" that would work are of course not government rules, political rules dictated by a small group. "The same set of rules" has to be based on a broader more natural set of laws.

So, for example, "no borders" would not work if a person could be 'punished' on the basis of not having money or failing to respect those who do, being from a certain group, ethnicity race etc as a minority etc.

The only criteria that has to be universally respected is the actual infringement on somebody else's space. You are free to smoke anything, not free to blow the smoke toward somebody.

Ultimately 'no border' society evolves, it isn't imposed even by idealists unless they are masochists. Society started with only families at the dawn of humanity. Then families and clans. Then families, clans and tribes. Then families, clans, tribes and nations. Now we are at families, clans, tribes, nations and ideologies. If you try to step on a previous group though your 'ideology' will get eaten.

I don't see those who claimed lands as bad, evil people trying to rule others. Who claimed lands needed to have security mechanisms to defend their land, what means they needed to be intelligent persons, able to create things and solve problems.

The biggest part of population wasn't (and isn't) able to do it, so they prefered just to be a "serf", to work for the lord land and have food and protection (these days things didn't change so much). Some people can say: "The lord land explored the other people"... But no, it didn't happen. He had the land and those people wanted to be there, it's a deal, if they were unhappy they could like by themselves on the forests, mountains or to find another land.

If a person takes enough land to live and does not kill those who settle nearby then all is good. But that is not the reality today. Some people own enough land for thousands of people, and many others own none.

Living in the forests or going to new places is not an easy option. You need to buy paper to not be harassed by police, you need to be careful of local customs to not get attacked for offending somebody's belief, etc.

No matter how good your intention may be, i.e., just to settle harmlessly somewhere and live your life, in most places you cannot do that because a) government employees will attack you and b) wealthy people who see you as a threat to their power will attack you and c) poor uneducated people who see you as a threat to their bliss will attack you.

Government is still necessary until education makes it not.

I was talking about the middle ages and before. The beginning of our society. Today is similar on some aspects, but the humanity evolved, technology evolved, everything evolved...

We can't live in 2017 like nomads and forest-bush people.

I don't believe homogeneity would result in stagnation. Look at Japan and Korea. They are some of the most homogeneous countries around  and they are doing just fine. They managed to survive without all these multiculturalism shit.

Multiculturalism would only benefit the larger society if the minorities are willing to assimilate to the larger population. Instead, what we are seeing are ghettos. Though not necessarily bad on their own, it does lead some to feeling "different" from the society they live in. I guess Singapore have set a good example with their racial/ethnic integration policies to ensure that its Han, Malay and Indian population are  mixed together. Europeans would probably cringe at the mere mention of it though, cause you know, rights...

Open borders in western Europe used to work because despite the varying languages the people have some degree of cultural affinity with each other. Unfortunate that it was hijacked.

You have it backwards.

Society tries to get to where one person in the wilderness is, but society is hampered by technology and other fake appendages.

A person who leaves society does not strive to create the disease they had in society. Look at the Amish and many other very civilized groups whose laws are more natural. They don't ask for paper and they don't offer it. If our modern society were made of people who could live on their own, without gangsterism, there would not be any discussion needed.

In the name of globalization.. somewhere in the future, maybe a hundred years, maybe a thousand, the world will almost definitely be globalized and will have much less restrictions.

Any global ideology that relates to politics from my own point of view will not work. Other areas might work such as security or finance or accounts but  not politics because how do we even start from the majority of Whites that are racist not even considering the people from the Islamic countries, not even countries that are against the West with everything within them among other factors that will negate such movement.

If you are going to change somebody's quotes so dramatically you should remove their name first. You can just put the word quote in blocks


Food is just one aspect of a person's lower nature. Regardless, a person has a living nature that exists in a physical form whether the person is 'alone in the wilderness', or in the middle of a crowd.

The amish, like most groups who respect nature, were persecuted out of their original locations. http://www.amishnews.com/amisharticles/fromoldtonew.htm

The amish are smart and know that the first sentence of your last paragraph is nonsense. They live healthy lives but because their ideas of health are different than the prevalent gang they are cautious regarding threats from 'opposition or punishment'. A person who "does as the Romans do" is safe in Rome. Those who try to live apart have to be careful.

Heroin / meth / etc are not healthy, but anything can be ascribed to 'spiritual forces'. Those drugs are expensive and illegal, society charges an extra price for them. In places where opium is legal but discouraged informally you see much less harm.

In our society there are much more unhealthy things than drugs, but which are not discouraged or may even be encouraged. The price for those things is not so immediate and obvious. Would you call the lack of a price imposed by society "spiritual forces working their magic"? Of course not. You are confusing government with some deity.

A person should look for flaws near them, not faraway.

You want to blame "whites" for human nature that everybody has and you want to give credit to "islamic countries" likewise for human things.

The problem is not 'whites' or 'islamic', the problem is people through ignorance try to blame 'white' or 'islamic' people for flaws everybody has.

I perceived the power of fasting in the Bible as a result of no distraction. The isolation allows one to be closer to God, to align yourself with his will. When you are on the same path, you gain access to all of the things one needs to navigate the path ;)

Also, substance is spiritual gravity. Mammon is all substance; our concern for our substance is what usually makes us sin. You surround yourself with substance, you suffer the woes of substance. Society hovers somewhere between spirituality and substance, a partial construct of both. It, like all things, can be a distraction.

I think you are right. There are many good things that people could get by creating world without borders, and maybe that is the future. If people could move freely from one place to another, that could solve a lot of difficulties for some people. But it would also mean that there would be unwanted people in some places, and it would create chaos. Some places would be overpopulated and some would be dead, with no people to live there. I am not sure if it would be good or bad, there would need to be some kind of restriction, but that is not without border than...

That is an interesting idea, the problem it will cause for some people though is when it is taken literally.

Very primitive people often have concrete gods, solid beings that have wills, desires, everything a person has.

More developed theologies emphasize that it is a fatal mistake to describe any aspect of a spiritual thing, including the concept of 'god'. The reason being that there is the dualistic world, which is physical and includes words, and the spiritual world which is not dualistic. There are some bridges between the two, like religion, archetypes, symbols etc, but when dualism is used to describe spiritual things there are the hunters who observe quietly and learn, and the hunted, who make the noise. It's explained here https://youtu.be/I7e9vnwTjJA?t=1m1s

More spiritual wisdom at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DgxGK2GOcQQ

If a person needs spiritual help they can watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73v0XWnDxK8 but do not dial the number on the screen, +1 800 433 1900 unless you have your credit card out.

If I was living in a barrel filled with shit in Guinea Bissau and the world's borders were thrown open, would I wait 15-30 years for my barrel of shit to dry out or move to New York tomorrow?

I'd go for NY. The average person wants it all now and why not?

Thing like that could never live up to the idea. With the ideology like that, culture and nationality would be somewhat lost and I personally wouldn't like that. I'm not for those hippie ideas that propose that all people should and can live all together in harmony... sorry, but that's nearly impossible and I don't want to get into discussion now because I'm tired and also, everyone should be able to see why it's a stupid idea. The first thing that should come to mind is the mass immigration, just look at the immigrant "crisis" but on a whole another level where everyone from the poor countries and regions would rush to the rich ones. I've always found hippies to be stupid with the ideas.

I'm against the idea. Equality is a myth, people are different, speak different languages and have different beliefs.
Now consider two things:
Some people will feel like it's their land and consider themselves natives.
There will be newcomers, migrants, that will have completely different values, unacceptable to the native population.

This will eventually lead to a segregation, with one of the communities being bound to enclosed settlements, or civil war. You just can't have open borders or people will start killing each other.

It means smugglers of every kind
It means people from every kind
it means trouble from every kind

It means less chance to get a job
it means over run public services
it means house prices go up
it means wages go down or stagnate
it means less chance to own a house if on the welfare
it means more chance of getting robbed
It means more chance of getting murdered
it means more chance of the native women getting raped

But other than that  ;D  everything is fine ..  ::)

This sounds like low income crime. You can't really attribute this to race or religion; these crimes exist everywhere some people have more than other people. This would be the same in the slums of Ohio, Chicago, London, hell, even North Korea.

And a staggering statistic on rape; the overwhelming majority of rape is conducted by an acquaintance. Thus would be a friend, or a neighbor, IR even a family member. Usually, not a random ass stranger. You would do more.to prevent 'native female' rape by removing said females from their communities, statistically speaking.

That's true certainly and it raises the issue of how the definition of rape evolves. It used to be common that when a person heard the word rape they would picture a violent struggle ending in a rape. Now there are cases like Julian Assange, accused of rape for not wearing a condom etc.

At some point the current word "rape" has to be forked into a few different words or it will be too diluted to be helpful to the most severe victims.

Regarding specifically the phrase 'native female rape', it is likely in many places that acquaintances even family are involved, but a) it is probably more common in a culture that has been crushed by another culture and b) in a lot of places there is a long term pattern of 'native women' belonging to a conquered group being abused at a high rate. That is the case with native women in the United States. Like the word 'rape', it is something that evolves. A thousand generations ago it would have been considered normal, like a natural law, that women of conquered groups have a low status in that regard. Today it is becoming less fashionable to conquer foreign groups and rape their women. At some point people will start wondering what good is an army then? But Julian Assange managed to find a 'rape victim' so there are still opportunities for rapists who do not like violence. 

Violence in any form of its manifestation is wrong and, as it were, everything did not happen, this in my opinion should not happen in human society. Violence is evil, which has already become a frequent visitor to the family and home, not just the streets.

Agree partially, but ultimately it's like smoking.

If a person wants to smoke they should make sure that the only people who they force their taste on are other smokers.

If a person does not want any violence, and they do not commit any violence, then they should not have violence imposed on them. But if a person looks for violence among strangers, they should find it.

In the case above, of 'native women', of course it is unbalanced, as Native women are generally very nonviolent.

The problem though is that 'violence', like 'rape', is a word that has shades of meaning. I agree with your value that violence is wrong, but it is more useful to figure out the cause than to just complain.  Hopefully as civilization progresses and terror is removed from some things then people will be able to more rationally analyze human nature, bad and good.

Ideology means the set of ideas or ideas, insights, opinions, or experiences.

If we remove the border policies then there are many negative impacts that will occur. Boundaries will no longer be there and people can live anywhere and countries will have no control over taxation. Criminality will increase and since there are no borders it is hard to implement plans for welfare since people from other countries may enjoy the benefits instead of the actual occupants. Taxes will be paid by the registered occupants but will be enjoyed by itinerant people.

Generally, liberal politicians support it because first world countries will be swamped with immigrants that vote liberal, totally wiping out conservatives. Businesses support is because they can import/export more, having more work done overseas and avoid taxes. Everybody else who wants it usually either wants it because they feel bad for people in need, or they just want their liberal politicians to succeed even if it costs us jobs and security.

The Border isn't really about the mexicans out, Look it here if the mexicans are able to come into the USA with such ease, It will be only a matter of time when Terrorists and Islamic radicals who wants to harm the USA turn their eyes towards that place. Its only a miracle there has not been a mass exodus from these terrorists. Its unfortunate that it will be a detriment to hardworking mexicans who want to work and make a better living for themselves.

I completely agree with you. Probably there are no more hardworking people than the Mexicans. America will lose a lot because of bans for this people. Just need to distinguish and separate the working people from criminals.

Well, I am not american and i don't live there, as a matter of fact i have nothing connecting me with America, and maybe closing border for mexican people is wrong. But if that is bad for america, and if in the future it proves that America can't go on without mexicans, new way of entry will be found. Ones country best interest doesn't necessarily means good for another.

We need another system that synchronously gives the opportunity to work in all spheres of life. In general, if the nomadic way of life prevails, then it will be necessary to make registration a requirement.

And I really don't think that many criminals are itching at the bits to come over here as well, for the record. Why leave one of the most corrupt police systems in the world, and come to the US, to commit crimes? So much easier to be a criminal in a place where you speak the language, know the cops, and the cops are on the take. Over here, a Mexican criminal is likely to be stopped for,  well, being Mexican.

Alarm over surge in migrant murder and rape suspects in Britain
www.express.co.uk › News › UK
23 May 2016 - HALF of all rape and murder suspects in some parts of Britain are ... with high immigration levels, the proportion rises to 50 per cent or more.

1,500 acid attacks in London, 400 in Newham alone – Westmonster
www.westmonster.com/1500-acid-attacks-in-london-400-in-newham-alone/
20 Mar 2017 - There have been an increasing number of acid attacks carried out in London, with 1,500 such reported instances since 2011. Worryingly

Thanks to Muslim immigration – 1500 acid attacks recorded in London ...
https://virginiapatriot1776.wordpress.com/.../thanks-to-muslim-immigration-1500-aci...
20 Mar 2017 - “There Have Been 1,500 Acid Attacks Since 2011 In… London,” by Christine Rousselle, Townhall, March 16, 2017 (thanks to The Religion of ...


Reported rapes in England and Wales double in four years | Society ...
https://www.theguardian.com › Lifestyle › Rape and sexual assault
12 Oct 2016 - Reported rapes in England and Wales double in four years ... Police and prosecutors believe that the rise in reported cases indicates that ..


Drug smugglers jailed over £90m cocaine haul | Daily Mail Online
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article.../Drug-smugglers-jailed-90m-cocaine-haul.html
A gang of drug smugglers were jailed today for sailing a record £90 million cocaine ... London's Snaresbrook Crown Court heard Customs and Excise and police ... and one which, on a global scale, costs those societies many billions of pounds. ..... '100 percent not true': Kris Jenner and Corey Gamble quash any rumors of a ...

Rising number of guns being smuggled into UK, Metropolitan police ...
https://www.theguardian.com › World › UK News › Metropolitan police
28 Sep 2016 - Met commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe tells hearing in London that his force seized a record 714 firearms in 2015.


National Crime Agency - Modern Slavery Human Trafficking Unit ...
www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/about-us/what-we.../uk-human-trafficking-centre
The Modern Slavery Human Trafficking Unit (MSHTU) is part of the Organised Crime Command in the NCA. We work in a coordinated way within the UK and internationally. Our work to combat modern slavery crimes involves a wide range of partners and stakeholders.

SOUNDS LIKE VERY LOW CRIME ^^^^^^^^

THE MUSLIMS TARGET INFIDELS AND RAPE THEM ;)..
All of the eight defendants were Pakistani Muslims and the girls white British. ... north of England, the majority of men involved in child-grooming criminal gangs ... he threatened to firebomb my home and rape my own mother if I tried to escape.
Rotherham child abuse scandal: 1,400 children exploited, report finds ...
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089
26 Aug 2014 - At least 1400 children were subjected to appalling sexual ... abducted, trafficked to other cities in England, beaten and intimidated, it said. ... Five men from the town were jailed for sexual offences against girls in 2010, but the ... with one young person telling the report's author that gang rape was a usual part ...

Even throw acid in white infidels faces ..

Boy, 17, arrested after four people injured in 'acid attacks' - The Sun
https://www.thesun.co.uk/.../four-people-injured-in-acid-attack-in-two-separate-locations...
10 Feb 2017 - Four people have been injured in 'acid attacks' in Canterbury city centre ... the scene and arrested a 17-year-old boy from London on suspicion ..


NO BOARDER SECURITY    ENJOY ^^^^^

Mainstream media i suppose? America has this image of being one of the top countries to work into. Or they may think that the authorities in the us would be a little bit softer since, as you've said, the authorities in mexico are so used to crime they may be a but more harsh

Most illegal immigrants didn't come to be criminals, but since you can't (legally) work as an illegal immigrant a lot to end up living a life of crime.

Also, here in the US you’re not going to be stopped for being of a certain nationality or skin color; you are only stopped if you have committed a crime (or if you’re suspected of committing a crime, also coming here illegally is a crime).

Mass third world immigration is only possible when BIG government feeds, houses and clothes the brown masses with your stolen income, this experiment in the West is going to be a miserable failure.
So if you like this idea of open borders I suggest you rewind the clock 150 years, dismantle the welfare state and remove income taxes, then you can open the borders.
Those able to survive by pulling up their own boot straps are welcome, freeloaders can eat from bins in the alley and die from the flu, or perhaps be fed and clothed as slaves.  :D

I think this illustration put the real scale of the exodus in perspective...

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303/imageroot/2017/03/28/20170401_map1.jpg

I am curious to know how the no border planners think about managing such a transfer.

And just think all those little and big dots all want to come to the UK..How will we cope :-\..

I know it's because we are so good ;D..

Mind you loads of space in Scotland and Ireland  ;D..

How many sharia court in scotland? I think they are more than 400 in london alone. Soon it will be mandatory to present yourself before a sharia judge and the pubs will all close down... it's spreading.

Ireland is safe, me think.

When I hear for the first time an unlimited society, I immediately think of the disadvantages, although of course there are some benefits.

I'm not saying that it is not good to have freedom in the circulation of people, goods, but there are no margins, it is very dangerous to lose any trace of uniqueness. The homogeneity is good to the extent that I believe that good intercultural communication is needed, but it must be kept specific.

I think what is happening now, that we are encouraged to have no borders in anything is a much more concerted thing. Homogeneity is very easy to control, while the specificity will always be rejected.

Isn't it a trap to foster a one world gov? Then when this gov follow a wrong policy (think nazi bad) there will 0 escape! As most are leftists, could they imagine trump president of the world gov?

Yeah but they would have many many safety nets set in place so that cant happen. You wouldnt want one country to have too much power because if they go rogue you are all screwed but I think we have generally gone

away from world domination world wars for the last time. As long as you had peaceful nations that had to agree with a violent act you will be fine (have Canada, Denmark, Sweden on the board and see if things happen).

Safety net? If i understand you well those globalists are so smart that they would design a system with safety net? You don't find your statement completly idiotic? Look they attempt to conquer china, russia amd the usa... it is not because most europeans politicians and big business are corrupts and dishonnest  to the core that real patriots elsewhere will let themselves be enslaved for a few bribes...

The most peaceful nation on earth is the usa!

Over the years when the Soviet Union still existed, there were many Soviet Russian moles that were sent to the United States. When they saw the freedom here, they loved it so much that they defected.

Around 1990, the Soviet Russia government collapsed into what is the more-or-less free trade operation that they have today.

The point is, let the people from the other nations come. Then, when the governments of the other nations see what draws people, they will change, or they will lose their people and have nobody to support them. In fact, if they re-design their governments like Soviet Russia did in 1990, and make their governments better than the United States, people will move back. Then it will be the time of the States to change and become better.

However, as these people come, let ALL Americans pick up their guns to make sure that the foreigners harm nobody.

8)

From https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1093806.msg24086652#msg24086652:


8)

We need a lot of borders. I like borders.
I keeps me safe from all that collectivists and statist crap.

One of your best post ever!

https://s14-eu5.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.gannett.edgesuite.net%2Farizonarepublic%2Fbrightcove%2F29901534001%2F201608%2F261%2F29901534001_5103398113001_5103381301001-vs.jpg&sp=e91c370641497c99095d3956400b40d4

Even pavel dogs would have run toward it!

For russia to improve looking at colorado and oregon would help.... guess in which aspect?