Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Andries Botha: Hi Judy. In a perfect world of course we should. In a realistic world we never get to. We live where we can afford to live, we live where we were told to live, we live where we were born. We live where our parents are buried. We live where we grew up. Our choices are really subscribed by the realities of international borders, boundaries. Very often like in South Africa people were removed, forcefully removed from where their ancestral homes are. So, yes in a perfect world of course we should get to choose where we live. The chances are more likely we may not be having to. So we do the best we can. In a world, in a perfect world, we get to live usually where we were born. We get to live where we can get work. Most people end up living where they can get work. Many African people travel to Europe in search of work, in search of opportunity. They end up living there. It’s not because they want to, it’s because they have to. So, our choices are circumscribed by the realities of our lives, not necessarily by our dreams.

by Andries Botha

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Angaangaq Lyberth: Judy, you and I we have the right to choose where we live. Most people have no choice. Just like you and I they have the right to choose where they live, but they are restricted by their own governments. I happen to be sitting next to a beautiful woman from [inaudible] who in the name of democracy has gone to war. And those oppressors who land in there don’t even give her permission to travel to where she need to travel, where she want to travel. Even to visit brothers in other countries. Under the pretend of the law of that it had to be your mother or your father. So when we talk about democracy and choosing to where we can live we haven’t got there. We just haven’t got there. We have a long way to go to understand the significance of the freedom to be able to choose where you live. Many of us are depending on the families inherited where we come from. So most of us don’t have that choice. But indeed, you have the freedom to choose where you live. Let me tell you I have seen parts of the world and it is absolutely incredibly beautiful place, what we call Mother Earth. Worth visiting. I pray to the Great One that you will be able to visit incredible place called Earth. Thank you.

by Angaangaq Lyberth

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Anthony Arnove: Absolutely. People should have this right. And it’s interesting that so many people in the world today do not have the rights to choose where they live, but so many people have been dispossessed from places that they would like to live, or have been compelled to exist in their circumstances that allow them no mobilization, no freedom of movement. And the reality is that the control of the movement of people is very beneficial to the interest of capital, very beneficial to the interest of politicians who act as the executive protectors of the interest of those corporations, of those corporate interests, because if you can control the migration of labor, you can control and isolate and divide workers through national boundaries, through state boundaries, through ethnic boundaries, you can keep people weak and divided. You can keep people from uniting collectively. You can keep people from finding circumstances in which they can improve their conditions and therefore threaten those divisions that are in the interest of people who find the capital, they can move the capital around the world, but then restrict the right of labor to move around the world, to find better circumstances, better conditions. And it helps to keep people isolated, marginalized, vulnerable in circumstances where they feel that they have no alternative. They have no ability to improve their circumstances or very little prospect of doing so. So, you find that. You also find people denied the right to choose where they live on political basis. So, for example, I as an American Jew, even though, I have never lived in the state of Israel or lived in Palestine and my family has never lived there, I have the right to return. I have the right to live in Israel, to be a citizen of Israel. But, people whose families were dispossessed, people who themselves were dispossessed in 1948 when the state of Israel was created, who were dispossessed in 1967 in that war and the expansion of the Israeli state and the expansion of settlements, people who have been refugees from their own homes, they do not have the right to return if they are a Palestinian, because of the political nature of that state. And that is a fundamentalist –- it’s an injustice, which is repeated in other conflicts around the world.

by Anthony Arnove

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Anuradha Koirala: Yes, of course, we have to have the right to choose where we live. We have a saying in our country that mother and motherland is better than heaven.

by Anuradha Koirala

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Anuradha Mittal: Well, I believe, of course, we should have the right to choose where we live. I mean we live in a world where capital can move, where goods can move; and I don’t understand why there is a mystery about people moving. Why do we have borders when we are -- don’t have borders for capital and goods to flow and we do not want to give the same opportunity to the people. We forget that it’s economic policies which take away opportunities from people who are then forced to flee their lands. Look at NAFTA, North American Free Trade Agreement, which has resulted in almost 500 Mexican small family farmers being displaced from land each day. They are the people, for example, who tried to come to the United States with dreams but all that they find is incarceration at the border, xenophobic legislators. They find incarceration and sometimes even death at the border. So, if the goods and capital can move, I do believe that people should be allowed to move as well and have the right to choose where they live. And perhaps that will be one way of having peace in this world and promoting security of everyone because then we would all be living in nations which are diverse nations, and a unity can come from diversity.

by Anuradha Mittal

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Ashok Gangadean: I find this question very interesting in terms of the right to choose where we live. And again, the question of choice and where we live, our great spiritual traditions have taught us that where we are, can we really be here now. Most of us in our ego consciousness and ego life aren’t even right now, where we are. Because we are locked into the ego boxes of our minds and the artificial spaces of our ego consciousness. And so our great teachers have taught us that even to achieve entering here and now, and to be here fully, truly now is a great achievement of freedom. And we have a choice of the consciousness in which we are in, that to me is the interesting question. And do we have a right to choose where we live? It’s in the other sense that we have the freedom and liberty to move around the planet and choose the location or even within our nation or culture, to relocate ourselves. Of course, that’s a more limiting form of the question. I don’t find that is interesting of having that right, but the right to be here now is the ultimate question for all human beings to wake up and be in this moment. And we do have a right and responsibility to make that choice to be here now. To me, that’s a great formula of global wisdom, be here now. Open up the space of this moment right here, in the space-time continuum. We do have a right and responsibility for that.

by Ashok Gangadean

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Audrey Kitagawa: It would be lovely to be able to live wherever you would wish to live, but people often face the constraints of many factors in their lives that do not allow them to live where they may wish. So it depends on each individual. Some people may want to live in a foreign country but may have family obligations and duties or may wish to live at home and their job requirements do not allow them to live at home. So this being a, a world where we are, we don't get everything we want, the ability to live where we want must take into consideration all the factors that one goes through in analyzing where it is best for one to live in any given circumstance in life. Many people from developing worlds would like to live in the developed world, but they have many difficulties. Some governments will not allow them the papers, the necessary documentation to be able to meet the requirements of the laws of the country to which they wish to move. So there are many factors that impede one's ability to be able to live where one may wish. But as a matter of opportunity, it would be lovely if we were all able to move about and go where we would want to. Is it possible? No, not in every situation, not in every circumstance. Is it appropriate? It depends from individual to individual. With respect to the laws and regulations of the laws of a country, they vary and are diverse, and laws are implemented and created by countries for a variety of reasons. So this actually is a very complex question even though it is posed in a very simple way.

by Audrey Kitagawa

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Avi Primor: Yes, we should have this right. Everybody should live there where he wants to, everyone should be allowed to live there as he wishes. But this has its limits too. One is not allowed to enter any other's house and just decide: "I want to live here at yours house'." It is not such simple. One should be allowed to live, to stay and to go there where one wants to, as long as one does not disturb or do harm to others. So you have to be considerate of others. But as long as one does not disturb others, one should be allowed to live there where one wants to. Sayings such as "You are born in a country, so you belong to this country." are mindless. Country, state and nation do exist for the individual and not vice versa. Every individual should select his own life and his way as he will. So again: As long as he does not disturb others.

by Avi Primor

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Benjamin Fahrer: We are born into this world in a place with the family, with the life in conditions that are the kind of -- yoga says it is our karma. So, we’re born into this life with karma. And do we have the right to change that? Do we have the right to choose where we live? It comes right after the question of our freedom. Do you have the freedom to choose on where we want to live? And in some cultures in countries, it’s a very easy one. Yes, we have the freedom to choose where we want to live. I want to live in California, I can live in California. If I decide to live in the other part of the country, I can. If want to go to Italy, or to France, or South America, to Germany, wherever I want to go in some ways, if I want to live there, I can. And in other cases you can’t because of different political things that are in the way or that have been set up so that not everyone can choose. And in other country like America they exercise that freedom of choice more than in other countries. Whereas in other countries, people don’t have the resources available to them to choose, to step out of the current cycle that they’re in, the hardship that they’re in because of the economics and the social systems that they’ve been born into; it’s very hard to choose to leave and to move from where they live. Should we have the right to choose where we want to live? Should we have the right? Could we have the right? Do we have the right? Do we need to have the right? We are the children of the earth. We walk upon her land. She supports every step that we take. It’s the mother that we live upon her should be in a way of respect and responsibility, and it does take in the consideration in where you live, though it depends on the culture that wish to discern yourself with, and if that is supportive of who you are as a person. And if you need to choose a different context then to be who you are, which truly that you are, and so be it.

by Benjamin Fahrer

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Benson Venegas: I think we should have the right to choose how to live better. And for that reason, we need to make every place in the world, on this planet, a better place to live. There's a myth that the grass is greener on the other fence of my neighbor property. We need to eliminate this myth. And if we make every place in the world a better place to live, then the choice is not where I should live, the choice would be, how can I make a better way to live.

by Benson Venegas

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Bill Joy: Yes. Everybody should be able to live where they want. It’s a fundamental human right. There are many beautiful places in the world and the life experience that you have is so greatly effected. I myself love the tropics, historically is a dangerous place to live. It was malarial and there are other problems, not that I’m a great fan of air conditioning but I think you can live there now in safety. And my heritage is I’m Scandanavian and we have to use a lot of sun block to be in the tropics. In fact I live in the mountains right now, I like to ski. But I think everybody should have an opportunity to be able to move to a place that’s more to their liking whether it’s to the city, the country, the mountains, the sea. And have an opportunity to have different experiences in their life. And hopefully that will become possible for more and more people as time goes by.

by Bill Joy

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Bora Cosic: Free choice of residence should be one of the basic human rights. In this sense we should forget expressions like asylum, refuge, exile, etc people must have right to live where they like the best. I live in Berlin not as immigrant even that I left my own country out of the political and moral reasons. But I started the life here out of the free choice, I also could have gone somewhere else but I didn’t. There today I'm in Berlin on the [...] on the Babel square trying as all of the others to change the meaning of this square where once books have been burned and now there is a monument of Book here in front of the university.

by Bora Cosic

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Brian J. Weller: I would say, yes. Although, in a sense we do have the freedom to choose where we live, it’s very essential I think that when we choose where we’re going to live that we respect the pre-existing values and traditions of that place. I think many of the racial and ethnic conflicts around the world are due to the fact that people do migrate and obviously they carry their own traditions with them, but often don’t then respect the conditions they find where they come to. So, I suppose on a practical side when we think about emigration and immigration, do we have the right to choose? I think, yeah, given that again we respect the values of the place where we’re coming to. Those will really be set down, I guess, by the country of origin, those criteria are set down. This is a good question, because I mean as world population is rising and particularly with conflicts around the world, there’s a lot of people desperate to move to places of safety. Thinking about this a little more, with the threats to climate and climate change right now and we’re already seeing rising in sea levels. In fact, in Britain, I’ve just come over from London and apparently the Thames barrier, the River Thames into London is noticing a 4 centimeter increase in the water level coming out of the sea. So, since 80 percent of the world’s population line lowland areas and coastal regions, I think the pressure of people to move to higher ground is going to be greater and greater. So, I think this question really points to the heart of something we’ve got to consider, which is you know, how do we choose the place we want to live and how do you do that in a way that’s equitable and respectful. It’s a great question.

by Brian J. Weller

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Catherine David: In principle, it seems as if the liberty of circulation is a fundamental liberty. This is on the level of principles. Now if we look at the level of reality, the choice of circulating as we want it and where we want to go is extremely dependent on the where they come from dependent on their economic standard. So, I think in deed and once again, that on the level of principles, it is a fundamental right and on the level of realities you have to refrain from this right, I think that there is no need to be a genius, one has to take a look around to see that the circulation of human beings is much more difficult than the circulation of money and of goods. I think when we are talking of, let us say more liberty of circulation, we have to be a bit honest to see that money and the things, the objects, the goods circulate more and more better and the human beings do not in such a good way. We have to know that a certain number of individuals, subjects coming from certain countries are not allowed to move and can only do it under illegal conditions, extremely unsafe that risk and endanger their lives. I think that all this demonstrates that a right of absolute time is not a relative right.

by Catherine David

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

China Keitetsi: I think, yes, I would like to choose where I live; the environment, where I am close to, whether it's close to my work, where I feel easier. But of course, it should be a limit. If I want to live up in the Mars I shouldn't be allowed, or if I want to eat, to live and sleep in my car in the middle of the road or on the side of the road, I think I shouldn't be allowed. But as long as it doesn't offend anybody, we should choose to live where we want. But as today, many people who want to visit other countries, it's a hard process to get visitors and sometimes you are denied simply because they suspect you that you want to return back home, and mostly of course it is difficult for the developing countries. And I think it is so sad that you're simply denied to even step your foot - your feet - to other countries. For example, one time I wanted to go to Dubai, but because I have a 1951 Geneva Convention passport I was not allowed and the reason for this I asked they told me because I didn't belong anywhere, because I didn't have a country. And I felt very sad that simply you as a human being, you are denied to go to a country of the other human being, simply because they think you might stay there and not return back to your country.

by China Keitetsi

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Constantin von Barloewen: Many people in the world don't have the right to choose where they want to live. In the past decades there have been more and more streams of migrants, never before in our history have the streams of migrants been as strong as in the past decades. If we consider that millions of people from Latin America, Central America, from Guatemala, from Nicaragua and from Mexico as well stream to America. If we consider, a scandal, that every day hundreds, if not thousands of African refugees land on the beaches of the canary islands where they are confronted with noisy and drinking tourists. This is a serious question. Of course we have to respect the national authority of a state, for instance of the European Commission, but on the other hand we can't build up tents and military camps along the border of North Africa in order to prevent these streams of migration. We have to establish economic conditions in these states of Latin America and Africa that guarantee lives worthy of a human being for the population, also in social responsibility, so that the wish to emigrate does not emerge at all. On the other hand we know that today the payments amounting to billions by emigrants in North America e.g. flow back to Mexico or Nicararagua or Africa, that these payments make up more than just a big part of the gross national product of these states, that is to say here we have the inversion of economic influence. These are high prices that are paid for this bondage, this is also a loss of cultural identity and thus of human identity. We have to exclude dictatorial periods such as the Nazi period. Today it is about establishing economic situations in the so called peripheral states by development policies, by responsible social policies, by educational policies that make migration unnecessary under these circumstances, so that these states are enabled to secure their population and to prevent streams of migration at all, not just to reduce the number of potential migrants. But this is a mere utopia, this will not happen, because the inequalities between the states of the first world and the peripheral states increase and don't decrease, because of a misled and purely economic globalization. The gross national products of the African states in the past thirty, forty years, have not increased, in proportion to the world's gross national product they have in fact even decreased. Africa's share of the world does not increase, it decreases. Other states such as Korea or India increase, but Africa decreases, consequently we have more streams of migration, this must surely be stated.

by Constantin von Barloewen

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Cornel West: I think a basic freedom, a basic right is certainly to be able to choose where one lives. But, of course, some responsibility goes alongside all choices; and one fundamental form of responsibility has to do with ties, has to do with bonds, relation to one’s family, relation to one’s vocation and relation to one’s profession. Usually, where one lives has something to do with employment possibilities, it has something to do with one’s love interest, it has something to do with one’s geographical roots, with history and heritage. But in the end, should we have the right to choose where we live? Absolutely, but all choice is dependent on a context. And all choice is tied to certain kinds of responsibility and culpabilities that we must never overlook.

by Cornel West

Sep 9, 2006 1:15:00 PM cite

Dedi Baron: Answertext will be available soon.

by Dedi Baron