> The concept of citizenship and passports always seemed so archaic to me.
My understanding is that passports are really only about 100 years old, coming into existence (or being required, anyway) during the Great War.
> But just hypothetically, if I want to grab a bike, ride to some isolated forest in France, build a cabin and live the hermit life, I can not to that. I'd be forcefully removed and placed back into my designated space.
It's actually kind of the opposite: it's not that nowhere else will accept you; rather, it's that your country must accept you. It's kinda like family, one definition of which is that your family are those who, if you show up at their door, they have to take you in.
What doesn't make sense to me is dual (or treble) citizenship. My country is my country; I could renounce my citizenship and swear allegiance to another, but it doesn't make sense to be to be a citizen of two different countries. How can one bear equal allegiance to two?
My understanding is that passports are really only about 100 years old, coming into existence (or being required, anyway) during the Great War.
> But just hypothetically, if I want to grab a bike, ride to some isolated forest in France, build a cabin and live the hermit life, I can not to that. I'd be forcefully removed and placed back into my designated space.
It's actually kind of the opposite: it's not that nowhere else will accept you; rather, it's that your country must accept you. It's kinda like family, one definition of which is that your family are those who, if you show up at their door, they have to take you in.
What doesn't make sense to me is dual (or treble) citizenship. My country is my country; I could renounce my citizenship and swear allegiance to another, but it doesn't make sense to be to be a citizen of two different countries. How can one bear equal allegiance to two?