Topics Justice

Question (First question here:) If our world were to become a world without borders, would that necessarily be a good thing or a bad thing?

Accepted:
June 22, 2008

Comments

No. That is, it wouldn't necessarily be a good thing, and it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. It would depend on what this borderless world was like. There's a certain sort of idyllic situation we might imagine when we think of a borderless world where people are free (at least nominally) to live and work wherever they please. But not being someone who thinks government is inherently bad, I'm struck by the fact that governments make things possible that might be difficult or impossible without systems of taxation, law and so on. Would the borderless world be run by a single central government? If so, is it reasonable to think that any such government could rule effectively given the diversity of the world? Or would the borderless world be one with minimal government or no government? And if so, is the likely result an anarchy that would make most people worse off?

My own guess, for what's it's worth, is that whatever the evils of borders may be, the overall picture would be even more problematic if there weren't nation states. But with nation states, come borders. However, this is a guess and philosophy by itself isn't up to providing a really good answer here.

Question (First question here:) If our world were to become a world without borders, would that necessarily be a good thing or a bad thing? Accepted:June 22, 2008

Question (First question here:) If our world were to become a world without borders, would that necessarily be a good thing or a bad thing?

Accepted:
June 22, 2008