A world without borders?

[Naida_BR]

Boarders are necessary not to regulate and limit humans but we need them for spotting illegal materials.
Their need is to create some spots/places that would work as inspection places that would stop criminals in making their actions freely.

[MysteryMiner]

World without borders will be exactly like home without walls. No security, no privacy. We as a species need a structure. As a individual I need my room. As a family we need our house. As an ethnic group we need our country to keep niggers out.

[okala]

Let's think for a second.
Would such a world benefit mankind? Would it destabilize the current geo-economics? Is there even a remote possibility that we as humans let go of this ancient tradition of drawing lines on sand that have only served to create problems among masses and has done NOTHING good so far?

A world without border is the next generational world were the level of industrialization and globalisation will be at it pick, and adopting digital currency as the currency of the global village will be the ultimate. I believe this kind of world is achievable but it will take lots of efforts to have a peaceful borderless world.

[coins4commies]

Before today, I never read OP as a literal call to end borders.  I don't even agree with that.  

I always saw it as a call to end restrictions on human movement across borders.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't have passport control across borders but it doesn't mean we need that either.  I like to think of it as a global Schengen. When I travel within the US from state to state overland, I don't need to go through passport control.  The borders are still there and are still real.   I hardly need to get a visa to travel to most of the world.  

Giving people a right to movement doesn't mean they can come into your private space.  False dichotomy.  We can have freedom of movement and personal privacy.  

[Spendulus]

Before today, I never read OP as a literal call to end borders.  I don't even agree with that.  

I always saw it as a call to end restrictions on human movement across borders.  That doesn't mean we shouldn't have passport control across borders but it doesn't mean we need that either.  I like to think of it as a global Schengen. When I travel within the US from state to state overland, I don't need to go through passport control.  The borders are still there and are still real.   I hardly need to get a visa to travel to most of the world.  

Giving people a right to movement doesn't mean they can come into your private space.  False dichotomy.  We can have freedom of movement and personal privacy.  

The climate change effect of millions moving into Europe is millions times the prior co2 production per year, subtracted from their expected future co2 production per year.

And that adds to well in excess of a billion tons of co2 for a ten year period or so.

Guilt and responsibility for that falls on the likes of you, who actively encourage such illegal immigration.

[TECSHARE]

I will just leave this here: https://truththeory.com/2019/05/22/man-faces-20-years-in-prison-for-leaving-food-and-water-in-desert-for-migrants/

[Viron]

Let's think for a second.
Would such a world benefit mankind? Would it destabilize the current geo-economics? Is there even a remote possibility that we as humans let go of this ancient tradition of drawing lines on sand that have only served to create problems among masses and has done NOTHING good so far?

Even if you remove that particular barrier, there's still a ton of other barriers that'd prevent peace and prosperity, stuff like language, culture, beliefs, morals...etc.
It also needs to be said: this current migrant crisis has shown how bad it can be when people with no will to integrate swarm a country.
You can see the damages all over Europe.

[Airbuxf]

I think there is possibility for that, but there should be many changes in the world to do that. IDK the idea is to make 1 country or only no boarders. More possible is 1 country in future.

[Spendulus]

...

Giving people a right to movement doesn't mean they can come into your private space.  False dichotomy.  We can have freedom of movement and personal privacy.  

Not so, look at the plight of the ranchers along the US border. They can't even go out without firearms.

[wattcrypto]

I think we could all benefit from a world that does not have borders. There is a lot we can learn from each other and from different systems especially as we start to transact on a global scale it makes sense that we break down political 'walls'

wishful thinking but hey it might change over time 

[tinyblue]

That's not going to happen. By nature too many people desire power. Also, how is one person, entity, system, going to get things running for every corner of the Earth?

[bonker]

I think there is possibility for that, but there should be many changes in the world to do that. IDK the idea is to make 1 country or only no boarders. More possible is 1 country in future.

One country will never be possible in my opinion because each country have their own tradition and leaders so how they are going to merge each other and who will take over the power of that single country.

[sunilnagaraja1996]

Without border is very difficult to any country, so every country should have with border that is very safe to all, otherwise we should face many problems,it means no rules, anybody can enter easily.

[LUCKMCFLY]

I do not believe that it destabilizes the global geoeconomy, because the borders are made as a control measure, but we are all human, the frontiers as some technologies have been totally centralized and have not been totally released to humanity as a control measure.

If there were no borders it is very likely that the economies among the nations would be much more dynamic, there would not be so many problems of emigration to countries that offer a substantially strong economy, such as for example the US economy, that practically for any work you take you are paid instant and for what it is.

In countries where these possibilities do not exist, they are totally exploited, and they work long hours to earn very little, and this does not make sense, because if you work a lot you must earn a lot, that is law, otherwise it is a failed communist system that does not serve nothing but to delay a nation many years ago even of yesteryear.

The masses can not do much if their rulers do not provide certain facilities to leave and exchange goods and services, as well as materials for companies and give them capitalization power.
What has been achieved is between the borders to generate a big business among those who care for it, for example Border between Colombia-Venezuela, a normal country vs a destroyed country, where the government closed border and people must pay money to go through the illegal roads, that is a rot of a communist system and failed.

[BADecker]

^^^ You are right, but you are wrong.

We need borders to protect us in some ways. If you don't want a personal border like the walls of your house, unlock your doors, and advertise that you have done so. How long will it take before loads of people have taken everything that you own, and maybe raped your wife and killed you and your whole family?

Yet open borders are good for free trade.

The solution is to maintain local borders for traders, but to maintain standard borders for all who are malisciouly against us. This is accomplish by observing the people who come through the borders, and what they bring along with them. It is also accomplished by taking them to court for any harm or damage they do, and making them pay "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, life for life..." plus extra for the inconvenience they have caused.

In the case where they are to be executed for the harm/damage they have caused, let them work it off in forced labor before they are executed.

[StaffDear]

I think world without borders will bring chaos to all the cultures. It will cause mass migration to the wealthy countries,  bringing there crimes and ruination.

I think we could all benefit from a world that does not have borders. There is a lot we can learn from each other and from different systems especially as we start to transact on a global scale it makes sense that we break down political 'walls'

wishful thinking but hey it might change over time 

Not necessarily to live without borders to learn from each other. Now there is a great opportunity to travel. But better to live at your own home.

[uneng]

I do not believe that it destabilizes the global geoeconomy, because the borders are made as a control measure, but we are all human, the frontiers as some technologies have been totally centralized and have not been totally released to humanity as a control measure.

If there were no borders it is very likely that the economies among the nations would be much more dynamic, there would not be so many problems of emigration to countries that offer a substantially strong economy, such as for example the US economy, that practically for any work you take you are paid instant and for what it is.

In countries where these possibilities do not exist, they are totally exploited, and they work long hours to earn very little, and this does not make sense, because if you work a lot you must earn a lot, that is law, otherwise it is a failed communist system that does not serve nothing but to delay a nation many years ago even of yesteryear.

The masses can not do much if their rulers do not provide certain facilities to leave and exchange goods and services, as well as materials for companies and give them capitalization power.
What has been achieved is between the borders to generate a big business among those who care for it, for example Border between Colombia-Venezuela, a normal country vs a destroyed country, where the government closed border and people must pay money to go through the illegal roads, that is a rot of a communist system and failed.

Keep in mind countries where the situation is calamitous (like in Venezuela) people are guilty for that situation: they created the monsters, they believed in lies and blamed prosperous countries by envy. If they caused so much damage to their own lands, why should other countries accept them there? To take the risk of being invaded and destroyed by people who didn't care for their homeland?

Of course not everyone in a country is guilty for the currently situation and some people really don't deserve that miserable situation, but I put myself on the first world countries place to think how they feel about it. They are just caring for their countries, and thanks to borders they can do this.

Furthermore, economical barriers already don't exist, otherwise Venezuela wouldn't sell oil to Usa while blaming the imperialism.

[KingScorpio]

the world without borders will only exist for the super rich,

for all others there will be financial and social barriers at least.

even if you get a world without borders

you then get into a world where you have no money and need money for people to help you around.

plus

there will be people blocking foreigners especially tourists from visiting.

regards

[CARrency]

Let's think for a second.
Would such a world benefit mankind? Would it destabilize the current geo-economics? Is there even a remote possibility that we as humans let go of this ancient tradition of drawing lines on sand that have only served to create problems among masses and has done NOTHING good so far?

I think that would be great but that is just a child's dream. With a lot of things happened, people grew up with their anger with someone, someone that might be their countrymen, or from other countries. One of the 7 deadly sins is anger and that is the reason it can't be done. Addition to that is greed and I think that is the main reason why this will never happen.

[Daniel91]

Although in many terms one may call me a globalist, but I disagree on the idea of a world without any borders lol. Simply because a world without any borders would be played on the assumption that all ethnicity and all individuals will be equally open minded and not be conservative and live in harmony and such a broad assumption is expected to be more hazardous than we can imagine and it may even lead to a globalised civil war. So, I would never support such ideas until we have the technology to know what is in people's heart as maybe in their hearts they still prefer their ethnicity as most superior

It's great idea, I agree, but not for our time.
I believe that this will happen in the future, but in a very distant future, perhaps 1,000 or more years.
Right now, such idea is not realistic because people are not mature enough and we have a lot conflicts, different cultures and traditions and people have not yet learned to accept differences.
I think we will first have to create a unique world culture and tradition.