• OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They couldn’t effectively police borders, so they didn’t. Technology and population density influences the way the state works and whether they could do borders as they existed in the 20th century and exist in the 21st century.

    The argument isn’t against technology, it is saying borders as they are understood here are a relatively recent technology relying on other technologies

    • stevehobbes@lemy.lol
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      But that’s the way borders were understood then too… it was just harder to determine who was who?

      They’d kick you out and burn down your house or kill you for being an invader?

      • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’d kick you out and burn down your house or kill you for being an invader?

        That is a complete anachronism, unless you actually were an invader. Have you actually researched this or are you just taking your assumptions and trying to apply them to history?

        • stevehobbes@lemy.lol
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Go read some Greek history on the city states and ostracism, as well as the fact that it only worked because they had slaves and subjugated women?

          • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Exile as punishment for a crime and keeping slaves is distinct from having a border with border controls.

            • stevehobbes@lemy.lol
              cake
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ostracism only required a vote, no crime, and no defense was allowed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism

              The penalty for returning was death.

              Presumably even though there were no border controls, they would kill you if you returned.

              Honestly, I’m not sure what the fixation with a guy in a booth is about. Whether you get denied entry and they throw you out, or if they exile or ostracize you, what’s the difference?

                • stevehobbes@lemy.lol
                  cake
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  But if you can throw people out, and kill them when they come back why is it that different?

                  • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Denying entry to random people is different than telling someone to leave?

                    Imagine the difference between a bar with a bouncer at the door and a bar without, and then apply that principle at a much larger scale.