Today I discovered and now wholly endorse the Manifesto for the Abolition of International Apartheid written in 1997 by Yves Bonnardel and David Olivier. A plain copy without intrusive Lycos France ads is here. Read it.
More forthcoming and previous in my apartheid category.
Update 20120126: Replaced the first link above with the manifesto’s current site; http://membres.lycos.fr/maai/ and wayback archive of same missing full document.
Including the bit about “social [i.e. political] benefits”?
Yes. It says nothing about the level of political benefits. It is compatible with zero.
[…] And add the excellent Manifesto for the Abolition of International Apartheid to your network. […]
Framing apartheid
Dev Purkayastha, riffing on two of my recent posts, writes:
[Close-the-borders-protect-the-jawbs] is clearly winning out over intellectualized arguments by economists. I’ve mulling a strong counter-message that has more of an intuitive and emot…
[…] The comments on these posts are full of idiots, but the estimable Chris Rasch works in one of my favorite links — the Manifesto for the Abolition of International Apartheid. […]
[…] I’ll go further and suggest the letter that people ought to be signing on with is the Manifesto for the Abolition of International Apartheid. […]
[…] Which should be enough to win over any modern human (non-neanderthal) to open borders. The ethical argument for open borders is even better. Policymakers must take account of the many voters who disagree with Legrain, even if this is based on ignorance and prejudice. It is surely better to admit 500,000 immigrants annually and have social peace than 1m and riots. […]
[…] Read the whole thing. I link to it because it is a fine essay, but also because it ends with a link to the most excellent Manifesto of the Abolition of International Apartheid, which now has its own domain (and at this point, a mediocre website). The first of many times I have and will promote the Manifesto. […]
[…] mobility with no artificial restraints — abolish international apartheid. Surely Google can take a stronger stand than mine owners in South Africa did a century […]
I agree that all borders should be open. However all governments would have to eliminate all social/welfare programs to prevent the bankruptcy of the state or country.
I agree with John. 2011-10-13 A good way to start is to get rid of the social/welfare programs now and its related taxation. Take away the incentive to leave but leave the incentive to better your position through work, contribution and mutual cooperation (non govt imposed cooperation). Our back is broke now without more coming in. Get rid of the ‘tax others for me’ mentality and lets get to it.
[…] write about such eventually, but it’d be on the margin. And international apartheid is an abomination that should be eliminated immediately regardless of the long-term substitutability of development […]
[…] like to abolish the “crime of illegal immigration”, but it should, indeed all should be totally opposed to apartheid, which is precisely what restrictions on movement, working, and residence […]
[…] I hope to soon read and review the rest of Curtotti’s papers, and everything on abolishforeignness.org. As noted a few months ago, I also want to read and review all of openborders.info. It appears these two group sites come from different perspectives: Open Borders, libertarian/negative rights/economics; Abolish Foreignness, progressive/positive rights/humanitarian. That’s good: all sorts of arguments are needed to abolish the monster of international apartheid. […]
[…] Manifesto for the Abolition of International Apartheid. The international system of states, borders, and movement restrictions is not Apartheid. Almost every person in the world is equal, in that they are born citizens of one state. Under Apartheid, non-whites denied citizenship in their birth state. The Apartheid regime tried to legitimize this by creating puppet states for non-whites to be citizens of. The international community of nations refused to recognize this scheme. There may be situations in which a population of one nation state is so oppressed by another nation state that the population of the former have effectively been stripped of their citizenship. This relation may bear some similarity to Apartheid, and one extreme solution would be to make the entire population of the oppressed state full citizens of the oppressor state. In his 2008 campaign for U.S. president, Toyama Koichi made a case for the United States having such an oppressor relation with the whole world, and thus the obligation to grant all rights as citizens. However, the proper solution is full independence, de jure and de facto, for the oppressed people’s state (watch the linked video to the end, and see that Koichi agrees). In no case however is there a call for any citizen of any state to claim citizenship rights in or travel to, live or work in, any other state, without restriction, nor is there any similarity of this general system to Apartheid. […]
You are all delusional