[ExI] Just some thoughts, nothing new really
avant at sollegro.com
Mon May 20 03:30:39 UTC 2019
Quoting Rafal Smigrodzki:
> I say that you have the right of unilateral exclusion within your own
> home and your surrounding property, and your unilateral right to
> exclusion ends precisely where your neighbor's home and yard begins.
> Any greater exclusionary authority would require some manner of
> compact, agreement, or contract between you and your neighbors. The
> scope of which could be as simple as a neighborhood watch program or
> as complex as nationwide legislation. The reason for this is that
> otherwise, you are violating your neighbor's right to free association.
> ### Well, yes, obviously. A national immigration law is an agreement
> between many people. Assuming you accept the legitimacy of the
> legislature, is such immigration law, and my support for it,
> legitimate? Is it then wrong for US citizens to break that law by
> aiding and abetting illegal immigration? John Clark seems to think
> immigration law is illegitimate, AFAIK (hard to get clear statements
> out of him). What's your opinion?
If such law is passed by both houses, signed by the POTUS, and does
not conflict with the Constitution, then it is the rightful law of the
land. My opinion doesn't have much bearing on that. I will mention
however that citizenship is a tricky issue with regard to
multicultural republics. Rome for example fought a war with its
Italian neighbors over citizenship called the Social War. Then Roman
citizenship became a bone of contention and a political tool for the
better part of a thousand years before finally becoming one of the
nails in Rome's coffin. So it is not an issue to be taken lightly.
More information about the extropy-chat