Libertarians Are Worthless IF......

[erika]

If they are pro open borders. A country has to be soverign to exist otherwise it can be flooded with the third world and crushed.

Most libertarians and the party itself have the ideal that there should be open borders where anyone is free to come in.

One of the communist manifesto and Nwo's major constructs is to erase borders.


FUCK THE LIBERTARIANS.

Smash globalism.

[Brassmouth]

As long as there's absolutely NO amnesty then I believe there are valid arguments to be made for both sides. Certainly if it was a libertarian nation in the middle of Europe I could see how having tough immigration policy would prevent a bunch of people from the surrounding socialist countries from coming in and demanding welfare and socialized medicine.

But in the US i think as long as there's no amnesty we should have relatively open borders. Not totally, but.....well you get the idea. Also, in a libertarian society where the free market exists there'd be a LOT more jobs, so the notion that these immigrants would all be deadbeats isn't really accurate, IMO.

[Conza88]

:rolleyes:

[Monolithic]

borders don't exist

they're political concepts

[Kotin]

.. :rolleyes:

[Andrew-Austin]

Most libertarians and the party itself have the ideal that there should be open borders where anyone is free to come in.


Open borders yes, but I'm not sure there is a consensus on what that means. I think some libertarians feel "open" means people can come to American the legal way only, and that we should make it easier to come here legally.




One of the communist manifesto and Nwo's major constructs is to erase borders.

Libertarians obviously want open borders for entirely different reasons than the NWO does, so shouting "fuck them" might not be the best response.

[Josh_LA]

If they are pro open borders. A country has to be soverign to exist otherwise it can be flooded with the third world and crushed.

Most libertarians and the party itself have the ideal that there should be open borders where anyone is free to come in.

One of the communist manifesto and Nwo's major constructs is to erase borders.


FUCK THE LIBERTARIANS.

Smash globalism.

anybody is useless if they sit back.

[erika]

Nice spin but no one's buying it! And the harm it causes to the host nation is self evident!

SMASH GLOBALISM

[dannno]

If they are pro open borders. A country has to be soverign to exist otherwise it can be flooded with the third world and crushed.

Most libertarians and the party itself have the ideal that there should be open borders where anyone is free to come in.

One of the communist manifesto and Nwo's major constructs is to erase borders.


FUCK THE LIBERTARIANS.

Smash globalism.

Ummm, I don't think you quite understand the position or the principles behind it. There are a lot of libertarians who are ultimately for open borders, but want to protect our borders as it stands due to non-libertarian circumstances that we and other countries around us face.

This continent had open borders for a long, long, long time.

[heavenlyboy34]

In my experience, so-called "Libertarians" who advocate open borders are either anarchists, anarcho-capitalists, or very left-leaning libertarians. Classical Libertarians like Dr Paul advocate removing undue authority from government and empowering people to make the best border policy. Erika, you should read Dr Paul's writings on the subject as well as other classical libertarian writings before assuming so much.

[evilfunnystuff]

im for open borders as soon as we end all the entitlement programs that draw in those looking to leach off the system

[JoshLowry]

If they are pro open borders. A country has to be soverign to exist otherwise it can be flooded with the third world and crushed.

Most libertarians and the party itself have the ideal that there should be open borders where anyone is free to come in.

One of the communist manifesto and Nwo's major constructs is to erase borders.


FUCK THE LIBERTARIANS.

Smash globalism.

Don't take the troll bait!

http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/1114930800/_i/6621920/1.jpg

[Kludge]

FUCK THE LIBERTARIANS.

Thank you. I'm tired of doing all the work.

[SeanEdwards]

borders don't exist

they're political concepts

The right to life doesn't exist. It's a political concept.

[FindLiberty]

im for open borders as soon as we end all the entitlement programs that draw in those looking to leach off the system

Yes, and right now the Ponzi scheme is mostly being propped up by inflation and new immigrants.
Without the latter, we would be at negative population (un)growth.

The Ponzi and fed schemes should collapse, the sooner the better since we can't seem to gently change course.
So, maybe we should throw everyone (new) out and then grind to a halt just to find out what a bad idea it is (bad to reject Liberty).
Unfortunately, the state will still expand - while claiming to "rescue" us from their prior failed schemes.

[Brassmouth]

In my experience, so-called "Libertarians" who advocate open borders are either anarchists, anarcho-capitalists, or very left-leaning libertarians. Classical Libertarians like Dr Paul advocate removing undue authority from government and empowering people to make the best border policy. Erika, you should read Dr Paul's writings on the subject as well as other classical libertarian writings before assuming so much.

...the term is "classical liberal," and Dr. Paul's stances are by no means the final say on what libertarians stand for. Immigration, like abortion and intellectual property rights, are issues that libertarians have differing opinions on.

[Kludge]

...the term is "classical liberal," and Dr. Paul's stances are by no means the final say on what libertarians stand for. Immigration, like abortion and intellectual property rights, are issues that libertarians have differing opinions on.

Hey! We don't need that namby-pamby wuss language around here!

Where's your patriotism?!

http://static.pyzam.com/img/funnypics/misc/Patriotism.jpg

[Conza88]

Don't take the troll bait!

http://i1.iofferphoto.com/img/1114930800/_i/6621920/1.jpg

Hahaha! I think it'd be hard to find a post as obvious as this one... LOL :D

[Fox McCloud]

Immigration wouldn't be a problem if we had a strong economy, IMHO.

I'm opposed to open borders now given our weak economic standings, and the fact that they receive quite a few things for free (ie: we subsidize them)....however, if we became more strong, economically, and those benefits were removed, I'd have no problem.

[erika]

Yes, and right now the Ponzi scheme is mostly being propped up by inflation and new immigrants.
Without the latter, we would be at negative population (un)growth.

The Ponzi and fed schemes should collapse, the sooner the better since we can't seem to gently change course.
So, maybe we should throw everyone (new) out and then grind to a halt just to find out what a bad idea it is (bad to reject Liberty).
Unfortunately, the state will still expand - while claiming to "rescue" us from their prior failed schemes.

I'm all for throwing out anyone who is ILLEGAL.

Since the 1965 immigration act limited LEGAL european immigration to about 1% each year I find that policy quite racist givin that the turd world is allowed to come in unabated and even their LEGAL immigration rate is near 98%.

We allow in at least 3 million legal people each year which near 100% are turd worlders. Is that the best and the brightest? No.

[tonesforjonesbones]

You can't have it both ways people. You can't have free trade (no borders) and sovereignty. Make a choice. I'm not so keen on this free market idea. I consider it GLOBALISM. Everything is about TRADE. $$$$$ ...and businesses being unfettered, but the free trade crushed our economy...it took all of our manufacturing out of the country causing loss of hundreds of thosuands of jobs. Free trade marketers have no allegience to anyone. We need to go back to TARIFFS! Tones

[erika]

Thank you. I'm tired of doing all the work.

You've done a wonderful job being a false opposition group, keeping the borders nice and open while the country is quickly overpopulating. Well done. The LP is one of the most worthless groups in California. Most people cannot stand their open border rejectamenta.

[erika]

You can't have it both ways people. You can't have free trade (no borders) and sovereignty. Make a choice. I'm not so keen on this free market idea. I consider it GLOBALISM. Everything is about TRADE. $$$$$ ...and businesses being unfettered, but the free trade crushed our economy...it took all of our manufacturing out of the country causing loss of hundreds of thosuands of jobs. Free trade marketers have no allegience to anyone. We need to go back to TARIFFS! Tones

Free trade isn't free.

[Kludge]

It should be noted that, as it stands currently, there is virtually no process by which unskilled laborers without connections can legally immigrate into the U.S.

[erika]

It should be noted that, as it stands currently, there is virtually no process by which unskilled laborers without connections can legally immigrate into the U.S.

I've met a lot of high skilled serbians and slavs who'd love an opportunity to work here.


Btw do you have any Evidence to support your claim, kludge?

Merely curious

[revolutionman]

i dont think you need secure boarders.

Just end the welfare entitlements that bring immigrants here by the millions and illegal immigration will go back to being a relatively benign issue.

[Kludge]

Evidence?


"There is virtually no process for unskilled immigrants without relations in the U.S. to apply for permanent legal residence. Only 10,000 green cards are allotted every year, and the wait time approaches infinity. (Those who receive H-2A or H-2B temporary visas for seasonal work cannot transition to a green card.)"

Flynn, Mike, and Shikha Dalmia. "What Part of Legal Immigration Don't You Understand?" Reason Magazine Oct. 2008: 32.

[erika]

"There is virtually no process for unskilled immigrants without relations in the U.S. to apply for permanent legal residence. Only 10,000 green cards are allotted every year, and the wait time approaches infinity. (Those who receive H-2A or H-2B temporary visas for seasonal work cannot transition to a green card.)"

Flynn, Mike, and Shikha Dalmia. "What Part of Legal Immigration Don't You Understand?" Reason Magazine Oct. 2008: 32.

Where is your link????????

Btw even if you're correct it does not defeat my argument. Any libertarian dirtbag/loser can write an article. Any neocon in newsweek can write one. That doesn't mean they are correct, unless they show realistic/scientific data.

Of course i'm not surprised about the "without relations" part. They probably have all of their illegal cousins now living here or a govt subsidized farmer who says that they are "skilled".

In fact it has been my experience that they have no fucking clue what they are doing givin that I narked out a company here in california for employing them illegally, and saw video evidence that they had no clue.

[Kludge]

There is no link. It is a magazine article from what I believe to be a respectable magazine, not a blog post by some white supremacist living out in the middle of nowhere with a dial-up connection fearing a cultural overrun.

If you feel it is important enough to disprove, try. If not, I believe my source to be strong enough to suffice as legitimate.

[heavenlyboy34]

i dont think you need secure boarders.

Just end the welfare entitlements that bring immigrants here by the millions and illegal immigration will go back to being a relatively benign issue.

But, what about the EVIL TERRORISTS?!!! They wanna kill you, your mommy, and your cute kids-haven't you heard? :rolleyes:;):eek:

[Kludge]

But, what about the EVIL TERRORISTS?!!! They wanna kill you, your mommy, and your cute kids-haven't you heard? :rolleyes:;):eek:


They also seek to establish a Communist government, destroy your "American culture", take your jobs, and spread diseases.

[erika]

There is no link. It is a magazine article from what I believe to be a respectable magazine, not a blog post by some white supremacist living out in the middle of nowhere with a dial-up connection fearing a cultural overrun.

If you feel it is important enough to disprove, try. If not, I believe my source to be strong enough to suffice as legitimate.

Or some cultural marxo-fascist ziotard named kludge. Your magazine quote is nothing more than opinion and doesn't hold water. Post the url, liar. I've already seen first hand that they are barely even low skilled and they haven't nary a fucking clue as to what they are doing. Definitly not the best and the brightest people that we could be bringing in here.

[erika]

They also seek to establish a Communist government, destroy your "American culture", take your jobs, and spread diseases.

Interestingly enough it's in the Communist Manifesto to erase borders.

Also in their is that a central bank is needed.

Thanks (fools)libertarians. No wonder you're not popular here.

[Kludge]

Or some cultural marxo-fascist ziotard named kludge. Your magazine quote is nothing more than opinion and doesn't hold water. Post the url, liar.

http://reason.org/immigrationchart.pdf

http://reason.org/immigrationchart2.pdf

If you have evidence to the contrary, post it.

[Kludge]

No wonder you're not popular here.

I don't seek to make many Stormfront friends, to be honest.

[erika]

Didn't see it there. Try again.

Btw even if you're correct it does not defeat my argument. Any libertarian dirtbag/loser can write an article. Any neocon in newsweek can write one. That doesn't mean they are correct, unless they show realistic/scientific data.

Of course i'm not surprised about the "without relations" part. They probably have all of their illegal cousins now living here or a govt subsidized farmer who says that they are "skilled".

In fact it has been my experience that they have no fucking clue what they are doing givin that I narked out a company here in california for employing them illegally, and saw video evidence that they had no clue.

[enter`name`here]

Thanks (fools)libertarians. No wonder you're not popular here.

Ron Paul isn't popular around here?

[erika]

Ron Paul isn't popular around here?

I meant california. No one here really likes the libertarians because they're pro open borders which ironically is what the NWO/NAU/globalists are pushing for.

Our state has been smashed with the turd world invasion.

[AutoDas]

We already have a closed border policy that somehow lets millions of so called illegals into this country already so why are you bitching at us? It's your xenophobic policies that have failed because libertarians do not constitute a majority in this country otherwise we would not just have open borders but no entitlement programs to entice unskilled labor. Libertarianism is against a national border because it hinders free trade and the Government has no right to determine who is allowed into this country, but it respects property rights so long as you can defend your property from these invaders.

[SeanEdwards]

I meant california. No one here really likes the libertarians because they're pro open borders which ironically is what the NWO/NAU/globalists are pushing for.

Our state has been smashed with the turd world invasion.

Cheer up, they'll go home when our economy tanks.

[heavenlyboy34]

We already have a closed border policy that somehow lets millions of so called illegals into this country already so why are you bitching at us? It's your xenophobic policies that have failed because libertarians do not constitute a majority in this country otherwise we would not just have open borders but no entitlement programs to entice unskilled labor. Libertarianism is against a national border because it hinders free trade and the Government has no right to determine who is allowed into this country, but it respects property rights so long as you can defend your property from these invaders.

this is from anarcho-capitalism, not libertarianism.

[heavenlyboy34]

Interestingly enough it's in the Communist Manifesto to erase borders.

Also in their is that a central bank is needed.

Thanks (fools)libertarians. No wonder you're not popular here.

You misunderstand. Communists seek to erase borders in order to create a communist state. Libertarians seek to diminish the power of the state to its legitimate functions. You sound more like a troll all the time, erika. Here's some Bastiat for you to read-http://lexrex.com/enlightened/AmericanIdeal/

Get back to us when you do your reading on Libertarianism and grow out of your silly ad hominem attacks, empty rhetoric, fallacies, and false claims.

[AutoDas]

this is from anarcho-capitalism, not libertarianism.

Anarcho-capitalism is the radical form of libertarianism.

[heavenlyboy34]

Anarcho-capitalism is the radical form of libertarianism.

Exactly true. Thanks...I didn't mean to cause confusion there. :D

[Number19]

I'd like to pose the question, to those who support controlled borders : what exactly is negative about open borders?

[Kludge]

I'd like to pose the question, to those who support controlled borders : what exactly is negative about open borders?

Post 30 and 31 answer your question, albeit a bit over-exaggerated.

[NMCB3]

As long as protective tariffs the welfare state and forced integration are in place, open borders are akin to national suicide.:)

[heavenlyboy34]

I'd like to pose the question, to those who support controlled borders : what exactly is negative about open borders?

In itself, nothing. However, in the modern world, some men desire tyranny. They would exploit the weakness of the inherent anarchy of a borderless world to instill fear in the masses. This tool would be used to make people DEMAND a one-world government of some sort.

The benefit of borders is that it promotes private ownership by giving people a sense that such and such land is "theirs". An organized state only becomes a problem only when governments organize to rule over people. (IMHO)

[Number19]

Post 30 and 31 answer your question, albeit a bit over-exaggerated.Because of a fear of outlaws? And fear of a political philosophy? These aren't serious responses, are they?

[Number19]

In itself, nothing. However, in the modern world, some men desire tyranny. They would exploit the weakness of the inherent anarchy of a borderless world to instill fear in the masses. This tool would be used to make people DEMAND a one-world government of some sort.

The benefit of borders is that it promotes private ownership by giving people a sense that such and such land is "theirs". An organized state only becomes a problem only when governments organize to rule over people. (IMHO)I'm not an anarchist. I guess I have a naive belief that free men and women are capable of keeping their freedom.

[Kludge]

Because of a fear of outlaws? And fear of a political philosophy? These aren't serious responses, are they?

It may be better explained in one of these heated topics...


Border Control/Immigration-

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=146961
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=145943
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=144651
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=138095

[SeanEdwards]

I'd like to pose the question, to those who support controlled borders : what exactly is negative about open borders?

Unchecked movement of criminals and dangerous materials.

Unchecked movement of destructive and invasive species.

Unchecked movement of communicable pathogens.

Unchecked mass human migrations, which can adversely effect environmental carrying capacity, and existing social order.

[Number19]

Unchecked movement of criminals and dangerous materials.

Unchecked movement of destructive and invasive species.

Unchecked movement of communicable pathogens.

Unchecked mass human migrations, which can adversely effect environmental carrying capacity, and existing social order.Something substantive. Thanks for the input.

Criminals and dangerous materials? This is not a concern to me.

Human migration, carrying capacity, social order? Not a concern.

Communicable pathogens? A little more thought here; but not a concern. I have "faith" ( I generally don't like to use this word ) in the field of medicine to control problems here.

Move of destructive and invasive species? Now this is something I haven't heard before. Being in an area that has a bad fire ant problem, this gives me pause to think twice. Still, I don't think it is a good enough reason to take away an individuals inherent freedom. Controlled borders work in two directions.

[Kludge]

It could be devastating if someone immigrated in who had a devastating new disease that transferred person-to-person.

The trouble is that even under "closed" borders, there would be no way to prevent a swarm of immigrants trying to escape the plague who may or may not already be infected.

[erika]

Zionism/Globalism and it's influence on immigration.

The Zionist Conspiracy Behind The 1965 Open Immigration Law! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTAgbo8e858

http://www.youtube.com/user/AbeEichmann

[erika]

Unchecked movement of criminals and dangerous materials.

Unchecked movement of destructive and invasive species.

Unchecked movement of communicable pathogens.

Unchecked mass human migrations, which can adversely effect environmental carrying capacity, and existing social order.


This kludge charactor is a vile globalist scumbag. imho

[Conza88]

Free trade isn't free.

Yes, it, is.

Managed trade isn't free. :rolleyes:

[erika]

Yes, it, is.

Managed trade isn't free. :rolleyes:

If it doesn't negatively impact and hurt other people, that could be acceptable possibly.

[Conza88]

If it doesn't negatively impact and hurt other people, that could be acceptable possibly.

Oh please explain that logic to me. LOL

You obviously have no understanding of basic economics.

Go read Economics in One Lesson. Educate yourself.

[erika]

Oh please explain that logic to me. LOL

You obviously have no understanding of basic economics.

Go read Economics in One Lesson. Educate yourself.

You missed my sarcasm. idjit.

[Conza88]

You missed my sarcasm. idjit.

You need an incredible amount of practice, because you obviously missed the sarcasm lessons. nitjit

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

I would contend that closed borders are very unlibertarian (and regardless of what ideology you cling to, disturbing as well). The main issue is welfare. Cut that off from them, and porous borders pose no problems.

In fact, if our economy were functioning correctly, that would be the ideal situation. We'd be begging mexico to send more because we'd be so starved for workers.

[Josh_LA]

You need an incredible amount of practice, because you obviously missed the sarcasm lessons. nitjit

says the guy who resorts to cussing and big bold letters to make his point.

[Conza88]

says the guy who resorts to cussing and big bold letters to make his point.

Says the guy who would have no remorse over killing innocent people who cannot defend themselves. Says the guy who doesn't know shit about monopolies or basic economics, yet proceeds under the impression he does. Says the guy who is a poster boy, whose every word is a defense or justification of indiscriminate violence in all it's forms. Says the guy who has admitted he does not want a free society. Says the guy who has no principles, or convictions. Says the guy who will take any position he can, making endless contridictionary statements in an attempt to weasel out of reality. Says the guy who wouldn't hesitate or feel remorse of killing and robbing people if it wasn't for his fear of government power. Says the guy who has no problems with the Nazi's exterminating those who cannot fend for themselves. Says the guy who despises civilization and hopes for tyranny. Says the guy who is immoral to his core & it seems, wishes to be the personification of evil.

[revolutionary8]

http://www.thefontman.com/troll_b_gone.gif

[libertarian4321]

You've done a wonderful job being a false opposition group, keeping the borders nice and open while the country is quickly overpopulating. Well done. The LP is one of the most worthless groups in California. Most people cannot stand their open border rejectamenta.

Most people can't stand moronic trolls, yet you are still here...

[Number19]

I wonder if my perspective, aside from my libertarian perspective, is influenced by by history. Texas had an open border with Mexico up until the early 1900's, with free movement of people across the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo. Through my school years, out in the Big Bend, we still had open borders. at least in the sense that we could come and go aross the border without checkpoints, etc. I really don't think this was truly shut down until Homeland Security.

[FindLiberty]

I wonder if my perspective, aside from my libertarian perspective, is influenced by by history. Texas had an open border with Mexico up until the early 1900's, with free movement of people across the Rio Grande/Rio Bravo. Through my school years, out in the Big Bend, we still had open borders. at least in the sense that we could come and go aross the border without checkpoints, etc. I really don't think this was truly shut down until Homeland Security.

I'd like to ask the restricted borders anti-Libertarians to explain just when and why the "negative aspects" of open borders started to show up? Was "it" starting to get "real bad" by around, say 1912? I'm just looking for cause and effect opinions.

+++++++++

Maybe there is confusion with this issue and the intent of the first amendment that should be used to force all Borders book stores to remain open 24x7.

[Truth Warrior]

Statue of Liberty
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Liberty

A "gift" from French Freemasons. ;) :rolleyes:

[BuddyRey]

My story from the last time this issue came up...

There is an illegal immigration crisis plaguing the U.S. today, but the remedy proposed by most closed-border advocates is, unbeknownst to them, the entire cause of the crisis to begin with.

Our Immigration system is cumbersome, unwieldy, expensive, and riddled with quotas and double standards. I know because of a near first-hand experience with this grossly inefficient system.

True story: About six years ago, my dad met a resident-alien South Korean gentleman named Mr. Park, befriended him, and soon grew enamored with the prospect of starting a martial arts school with him. Mr. Park is a 5th degree Grand Master in Tae Kwon Do, with certificates and accolades galore from almost every major Tae Kwon Do academy in the world, including The Kukkiwan in Korea. He's one of only about 50 men in the entire country with his extensive accreditations, so we assumed getting his green card and other papers in order would be a breeze...right?

Well...not exactly.

First, Mr. Park was told he'd need a sponsor. Of course, my dad was more than willing to vouch for his prospective business partner, so this wasn't much of a hurdle. But in the ensuing months, all manner of application fees, processing fees, immigration attorney gratuities, and assorted hoops he had to jump through because of the government's monopoly on Immigration and Naturalization, ended up costing us around twenty-thousand American dollars.

What we were putting out to get Mr. Park's green card was just barely enough to keep our heads above water financially, because, as most entrepreneurs know, the first three years of a new business are usually the most trying and least profitable. All of these exorbitant fees for immigration bureaucrats ended up bankrupting our school. It folded after two years, meaning that all we paid in to the process ended up being for naught anyway. Mr. Park is living in another state now, my dad hasn't been able to get back on his feet since, and we ended up losing far more money from our venture than we took in from tuition during the school's brief history.

The Immigration bureaucracy stifles entrepreneurship, harms the economy, stagnates the creation of wealth, and hurts far more people than it has ever helped! It's time to realize that our country's immigration problem is caused not by ruthless scofflaws who get their jollies from spitting on our national heritage. It is caused by a corrupt and ineffectual governmental behemoth that exacts brutal and exploitative fees on human beings (many of whom have families, hopes, and dreams just like us) and preys on the desperation of Third-World refuse frantic to escape the Hell of plutocratic dictatorships or pestilential war-zones.

Just like outlawing guns insures that only outlaws will possess them, placing excessive strictures on the flow of the destitute into a rich and free nation insures that those among them who do harbor criminal intent will be over-represented in the numbers of such people who do finally get here illegally. That is why we've seen such an explosion of Latino gangland violence on our streets. The Latino population in the United States is over-represented by those whose regard for the law was not sufficient to bar their illegal entry into this country.

[Ozwest]

Community first.

Statehood first.

Decisions should flow from there.

[tonesforjonesbones]

There can be no free trade and sovereignty at the same time. tones

[revolutionman]

http://c1.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/44/l_ae373c39feeb4287979491bac989f3a4.jpg

[Richie]

(I didn't have the time to read this entire thread, so forgive me if these points have already been brought up.)

First of all, I am not an anarchist (though, I certainly do not condemn anarchists). I am a minarchist. I believe that some government has to exist.

The libertarian approach to immigration is often misunderstood.

Are our rights given to us by God (or nature) at birth, or are they given by the Bill of Rights as privileges to American citizens? The answer to this question should be obvious to any libertarian - our rights are inalienable, we are born with them. Since our rights come from God (or nature) and are inalienable, they are not exclusive to American citizens. Is freedom of movement a right? I consider it a right. So, if we are truly the land that recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals, any peaceful individual who's foot touches our land should have their freedom of movement recognized. HOWEVER... and this is a big however...

1. Your rights end at my property line. If a land owner on the border doesn't want people crossing his property, he has the right to put a stop to it; as long as he doesn't hurt anybody who don't intend to hurt him in the process.

2. The Bill of Rights, the document that recognizes (not grants!) and protects our rights under law, was made exclusively for the federal government. The states are not bound to it! Now, our states have their own bills of rights, but if you feel that immigration could damage your state, you can work to change your state!

I hope this makes it a little better. :)

[Kludge]

Community first.

Statehood first.

Decisions should flow from there.

As good Proletarian discipline dictates!

[mediahasyou]

Wheres the liberty in not allowing people to cross an invisible line?

[Conservationist]

A country has to be soverign to exist otherwise it can be flooded with the third world and crushed.

You're right, I think. Anytime someone has something of value, others will try to show up and parasitize it.

The real question is however: how to enforce this without destroying ourselves with pointless laws?