Eric July Talks Open Borders, Closed Borders on iState

Eric July Talks Open Borders, Closed Borders on iState


Eric July Talks Open Borders, Closed Borders on iState
Open Borders, Closed Borders Discussion with Eric July Open Borders, Closed Borders, Eric July, Backwordz,
Libertarian Paul Gordon of iState is joined by Eric July of Backwordz and Being
Libertarian to talk about the border ‘debate’ within
the Libertarian community between open and closed borders.

2 thoughts on “Eric July Talks Open Borders, Closed Borders on iState

  1. Open Borders, Closed Borders Discussion with Eric July
    Open Borders, Closed Borders, Eric July, Backwordz, Libertarian
    Paul Gordon of iState is joined by Eric July of Backwordz and Being Libertarian to talk about the border 'debate' within the Libertarian community between open and closed borders.
    Article http://istate.tv/borderline-love-istate-istv/
    – See more at http://istate.tv
    Also- http://nepas.tv
    – Support us at http://patreon.com/istate
    -Like us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/istatetv
    Find Backwordz at http://www.backwordzmusic.com/
    Find Eric July at https://www.facebook.com/EricJulyTX/

  2. Personally I am an ancap but I think a lot of ancaps make some assumptions about what a free society would look like that I think won’t be the case. So I’d like to add two points to that go into this debate.
    First I think that the assumption that once the state is abolished that all property would be owned by single person or corporate entity. If you look at how many small town have gotten services that they need like electricity, many of them have come to the idea of co-ops. And when arrived at on a voluntary basis and without coercion it is entirely consistent with ancap principles. So once things that the state now owns are released into private hands I do believe that many groups of people look to shared use or ownership as an efficient means of getting access to things like roads or even things like wilderness and hunting areas. But these things would not be freely used by anyone but only those people are are part of the group maintaining them. Which leads into my second point.
    Whether you see areas adopt this voluntary co-op or property entirely owned by single persons or entities communities will still seek to keep people out that they see detrimental to their communities. For example even large cities full of ancaps would probably not be ok with large groups of say Muslims seeking to impose sharia law on people or communists seeking to impose their ideas from moving into their city. This would mainly be a question of at what point would self defense of yourself and your liberties be justified. But I would guess that many would feel, and rightly so, that if people are moving into an area and taking actions that would negatively effect your personal liberties that organizing to keep those people out would be justified.
    Basically, without a state I would assume that some people would still organize, though now on a voluntary basis, to get needs met. Defense of yourself and property that you use would probably fall into that category and so I do believe you would see some areas with closed and restrictive movements as people in those areas would seek to protect their interests in that area.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *