the ethical implications with open borders

The Decleration Throughout history man has created borders to protect themselves forging kingdoms and later nations.  Some of the most brutal wars have been fought over which country should have more favorable borders.  With all the examples of man's territorial nature, there are some who believe that open borders and the free movement of people could be the solution to a society that favors human rights and that by deniying people those freedoms you are stepping on their rights. in the book Exit West, the book describes how the world would look if freedom of movement was suddenly possible and people begin to flood into foreign places. As they arrive in these new places the migrants are often seen as invaders and attacked by nativist groups. While these attacks seem harsh are there ethical problems with completely open borders. to answer that question it truly falls down to what you consider ethical. to some they look at the third article of the universal declaration of human rights which states that every person has the right to life liberty and security of person. They interpret this article as in the fact that to deny

another human being safety is unethical. while on the flip side a person who believes that open borders are unethical sees not that taking in fleeing people as a responsibility but a failure of the country that they had fleed from. To continue, the reason people feel that open borders is a bad idea and unethical is that borders were often put up to protect something. They feel that if they had open borders the outsiders would come in and soil whatever they put up their borders to protect. They often talk about how it is unethical for a non-citizen to get the benefits that the citizen's taxes paid for. while this point does have some bits of truth in the fact that I do seem unfair for people's money to go towards somebody who had not carried his own load. hyistaria over open borders That being said I often find that the argument that open borders are unethical often leaves out the human factor of this whole argument. I believe that as "enlightened" Nations to knowingly see the suffering of our fellow man and not try and assist them in any way possible is unethical. We should not if we truly believe in the words of our enlightened forefathers reject the helpless the stranded and the poor and if opening the borders would help our fellow man and create a better world then I would wholeheartedly believe that open borders in an ethical thing to do. that being said opening our borders would not pose a host of other ethical debates as well. an example of this would be the fact that if the surge of new inhabits created such a strain on the government of that area would it be ethical to turn them away in order to save the people already there. Furthermore, who would govern this now the borderless world? would the world descend into proxy wars to expand the territory of other nations? Lastly, could borders be completely removed or would just the free movement of civilians is possible but not the total elimination of borders? In conclusion, if we were to eliminate borders completely would it be the breaking of chains set forth by our authoritarian ancestors or would the opening of borders start to unstitch the fabric of human civilization. no more borders