Yeah, man. Lit article again. :D
Thanks!
Generally, imo the world should be a place where nearly everyone can be/go anywhere he wants to because non of us owns the world and borders/states... were created by humans. Of course this is just a probably (nearly/quite) impossible "wish-situation", wishful thinking. Why? Because the world is far away from this perfect situation/status.
I agree!
BUT..
The way we get this situation, where everyone can go everywhere, is to dissolve of the idea that these people own the land.
After the fact of them owning it, it's just a function of what ownership entails that they can restrict access to it.
And they can even do other things internally, like make you pay if you want to claim unused land somewhere, which is kind of like a softer version of restricting.
Everyone would have to be nice/friendly/cooperative/social... no one must have the "desire and respectively intention" to hurt or kill anyone else and so on.
Sort of. But eventually there comes a point where there's an overwhelming incentive to be peaceful. And if people are treated peacefully (especially as children) they're very unlikely to want to be violent. So the eggshell peels pretty quick.
And the few bad apples can just be dealt with and barred from civil society somehow. We don't need to institutionalize layers of violence just because there may never be absolutely no violence everywhere.
Cheers Gandalf!
As always, you are welcome!
But it is not only the government, but I know what you mean. Ownership originated thousands of years ago - and I dont think that it is bad; I think it is necessary and good. You need your own area where you can chill (you want an own house maybe even with a garden and so on)... but we are probably talking about ownership regarding the politicians etc. - the "powerful people"; borders and stuff.
However, I have to mention that those people do not own the land and they do not rule it (I mean, often there is the law which says what is allowed and what is not; and "we" created the law - but you cannot generalize that because some states are/were not that democratic while making law, I believe).
Ah, I am sorry. That is too sketchy right now. I am just throwing some phrases/words around haha - this topic is very difficult/special. It probably would take me hours to write all my thoughts down. ;D
Presumably "consensus" would be a keyword here.
Some laws need to be "re-issued".
All in all, I fully understand you and share your opinion. Although I am writing quite unstructured right now...
And yeah, there will never only be peace - at least it seems very surreal to me haha.
Cheers!
Oh, it's all good, it's fine to throw out loose thoughts sometimes! And I sort of follow.
"Ownership" of land is an interesting topic
Unlike other things like pencils and automobiles, the land is just here. It's not created by anyone, it's not a byproduct of anyone's life energy. So I actually don't think it necessarily follows the same rules as pencils and automobiles, and subscribe to the idea that you "claim" land when you actively use it.
You claim the right to use the land, but not to own it per se in the same way that we own a pencil (usually it will work out the same, but I think with some exceptions in the outermost circumstances).
I actually tend to think that a voluntary world would result in collective "ownership" (use) of land. Whatever community you're a part of uses the land, and then inside of that, you know "ok, john sleeps over there" and keep track of it casually similar to what you'd do in a family environment.
Haha, good.
Indeed.
Uhm... Yeah we do not own it for real, but we own it if we are the owner (at least law says so - of course in a more formal way haha).
"I actually tend to think that a voluntary world would result in collective "ownership" (use) of land. Whatever community you're a part of uses the land, and then inside of that, you know "ok, john sleeps over there" and keep track of it casually similar to what you'd do in a family environment."
Yeah, that is right. We only say that a certain person/the state... owns a part of the land because we need to live/work/... somewhere. And of course because of some other reasons, eg. structural reasons (person A lives there, person B next to him,...).