There has been a lot of political teeth-gnashing—amplified and intensified by corporate news media—over building a wall along the southern US border. Reasonable folks on both sides of the issue (pun intended) recognize that a border wall is largely, if not entirely, symbolic. It will make it more difficult for wildlife to traverse their migratory routes, but it will do little or nothing to keep brown people out or dissuade illegal commerce. I suspect, however, that the most virulent supporters of the wall are unable to separate its symbolic role from its efficaciousness. To them, the most important thing is to have some concrete and tangible representation of what is in reality mere idea, a geopolitical invention.
Borders don’t exist, of course, at least not those associated with politically-defined territories. They are abstract entities, and their placement is entirely arbitrary. Many make use of physical boundaries, rivers or mountain ranges that serve as natural barriers to easy travel. But others consist of nothing more than map coordinates. I remember visiting the Four Corners monument as a child, standing on the engraved circle at the precise point where Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, and Colorado meet, and marveling at how the surrounding land looked exactly the same in every direction. Why exactly here, I thought, why not three feet one way or another? It would have made absolutely no difference.
To say that I am a fan of open borders misses the point. I am a fan of open acknowledgement of the reality that borders do not exist outside of the make-believe worlds of civilization. I am a fan of open awareness that borders and property boundaries of all kinds are weapons of immiseration, technologies of oppression and control, tools the powerful use to keep and enhance their power.
