Doug Morris

Individuals at the sensory or perceptual level can't have morality or even be working on developing it. Only once an individual reaches a sufficient level of abstraction in the conceptual level can he or she begin developing a morality.

It can be a subjective reaction on Mr. Smith's part to dislike spinach, and at the same time an objective fact that he dislikes it.

Why don't you like them? What is it about them that you don't like?

You don't think there will be a gradual increase in the number of people who think for themselves, with the increase becoming more rapid as the number increases?

Sauron, Maia who faithfully served a particular Vala for a very long time, was badly disfigured by the fall of Numenor, gave away rings of power which benefited the elves, employed many orcs against whom other races were prejudiced, and brought functioning government to Mordor, passes into the Void at a very great age, due to magical effects and the actions of a conspiracy, with the crucial final blow being due to the actions of Gollum, who was a murderer and sick with evil.

Completely opening borders will not solve everything. Defeating Elizabeth Warren will not solve everything. Repealing the antitrust laws will not solve everything. But each would be a positive step.

Another simple answer is that there's too much statism in the world.

Because it's the minimum display of "good faith"...? The least acknowledgment of what they are gaining in return. Iow, no sacrifice. These seem like pretty weak arguments. Why don't they apply when I cross a state or county line?

I don't have to identify myself to cross a state or county line or for most other movement, or if I pay cash for something in a store. So it is not a special dispensation; it is a normal condition of movement, available to everyone.

We need to distinguish clearly between immigration and citizenship. People who wish to become citizens should have to clearly identify themselves. But people who simply enter the country are not entering into that kind of contract. Why should they have to identify themselves?

The government still wouldn't have the right to impose such restrictions itself. Government is a much greater threat to freedom of movement that a hypothetical banding together of all property owners. What about the right of free access to and from one's own property?

When government manages property or something like property, then regardless of the rights and wrongs of that underlying situation, it should do so in a way that respects rights as much as possible, including the right to freedom of movement.

You've made a good point about the stagnation argument. If I somehow managed to live for a million years, how much would the me of a million years from now have in common with the me now? How much would the me of a million years from now even remember about the me now?

One counterargument mode by some science fiction stories is that it would cause things to stagnate. I'm skeptical of this counterargument, but uncertain.

One possible approach here would be to let everybody in, but document them. On the other hand, a person can start out with an extensive paper trail and human record and then drop off the grid and become untraceable.