Libertarian Party: Don't Blame Immigrants

[Shotdown1027]

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/04/libertarian-party-monday-message-dont-blame-immigrants/

[Vessol]

In a real free market we'd welcome immigrants and the market would expand with them.

In a state-controlled market, you fear immigrants and are told they are taking "your jobs".

[yongrel]

Wes Benedict is a badass.

[MN Patriot]

Once again the Libertarian Party swings and misses big time about immigration. I think most people aren't opposed to immigration itself, the issue is ILLEGAL immigrants. I haven't heard anyone complaining about the legal immigrants, but then the LP starts arguing like liberals, claiming that people resent immigrants in general.

Mexico needs to clean itself up, so it isn't such a crap hole that people want to escape from.

Of course ending the insane War on Drugs would be a start.

[Vessol]

If someone wants to escape from their hellhole and come to America and work their ass off to succeed, what's wrong with that? That's what was great about America before the Globalists took it over.

Get rid of welfare laws first. Then get rid of immigration laws.

[mikem317]

No, the real issue isn't "illegal" immigrants.

The real issue is the welfare-state that's bankrupting us, our children, and our children's children.

[silverhandorder]

The issue here is not on the ends but at the means. The means of letting people with no tradition of limited government to out vote the natives who are already having hard time limiting it is a recepie for disaster.

Just from a logistics point of view for libertarian ideology that is relatively in exile in America to side with a side that represents none of it's core values is suicide.

[Vessol]

The issue here is not on the ends but at the means. The means of letting people with no tradition of limited government to out vote the natives who are already having hard time limiting it is a recepie for disaster.

Just from a logistics point of view for libertarian ideology that is relatively in exile in America to side with a side that represents none of it's core values is suicide.

One could argue the same for the "End the Fed" movement, but it gained momentum.

Infact, I remember people saying similar things back before 2008, hell I remember thinking that 'End the Fed' would never catch on.

[silverhandorder]

End the FED is a no compromise position for us. We get what we want without giving up anything in return.

On the other hand this issue clearly has big ramifications. The biggest one is alienating conservatives. The second big issue is bolstering democrat ranks. Lastly you bring the system further towards insolvency.

If the state collapses you are not going to get limited government in the aftermath. The ammount of poor and ignorant people will overwhelm any rational discourse. You want as much time as possible for discourse so you win as many converts as you can.

[MN Patriot]

The issue here is not on the ends but at the means. The means of letting people with no tradition of limited government to out vote the natives who are already having hard time limiting it is a recepie for disaster.

Just from a logistics point of view for libertarian ideology that is relatively in exile in America to side with a side that represents none of it's core values is suicide.

I agree. There are enough Americans who have no appreciation for our original ideals of individual freedom. Then the liberals (and libertarians) let a bunch of illegals in to vote for the liberals.

[Vessol]

How dare we worry more about the expansion of the police state instead of worrying about evil liberals winning a fake election.

[silverhandorder]

"Fake elections" ? Does Obama's health care seem fake to you? How about the fact that liberals are not concerned with limiting the police state none the least? Or that the law it self simply a carbon copy of federal law?

[Vessol]

Liberals win. Government expands. Conservatives win. Government expands. Sounds fake to me.

[awake]

The vote is your problem. Democracy is the ability to vote yourself the property of others.

Anyone who works for the government or is a recipient of welfare in what ever form need not have a right to vote.

Pure taxpayers should have the exclusive right to vote only, including the power to vote to abolish democracy as every individual vote is honored as a voluntary wish to cooperate or succeed accordingly. If you want to earn the right to vote you must become a pure producer free from the payrolls and welfare rolls of the government otherwise you forfeit that right.

[silverhandorder]

Do you have any local Dem parties being taken over by Ron Paul people? When you do then come talk to me about taking a stand with liberals on the issue we lose either way. Why do you want to turn a lose/lose issue into a fucking suicide is beyond me.

[noxagol]

It's only illegal because the government says so. If the government decided that anyone and everyone could come, would you then not have a problem since they are no longer illegal?

[Lord Xar]

Yeah, a few hard-workers coming over here is great.. sure.. sounds good.

20+million illegal immigrants, the majority of which are uneducated, and low skilled and have alot of babies. Then they get to bring in their families, thru chain migration..... so we have 40+million new immigrants, mostly dependent, cheap labour, uneducated, unhealthy.... all looking to vote. And what are they voting for?

Yeah. SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN!! a REAL GOOD ONE.......... I can only surmise that a plan like this must of hatched from those brainiacs the liberals, I mean the libertarians...

wake me up in 20 years so I can cry for this country and laugh in your face for being wrong...

Keep in mind when the italians, the germans, the pols, the irish etc.. all came here, they had to cross a vast ocean. There was no turning back. They had to become american. Adopt this country as their homeland.
With the majority of illegals and legals alike, just a jont over the over border - they will never truly become an American. There will be no mass assimiliation. No love for this country. wake me up.

[Vessol]

So what's your plan for stopping them?

[silverhandorder]

Take away the welfare state and end birthright citizenship. The only party where we can succeed in doing that is the republican party and independents. Which would be overwhelmed if we support amnesty.

[Vessol]

I can see your point with the whole party thing. And that's what I've been saying. The ONLY way we can end the problems with immigration is through removing the Welfare State. There is no other way, that's what people need to understand.

We should just stay silent on this issue and keep on focusing on what we've been focusing on.

[silverhandorder]

Or just to point out that controling the border is a futile task and we must concentrate at the cause.

[Brian4Liberty]

In a state-controlled market, you fear immigrants and are told they are taking "your jobs".

No, unemployed people say "they took our jobs". The State tells us they take jobs that no one else will take, and that they are good for the economy.

[silverhandorder]

No, unemployed people say "they took our jobs". The State tells us they take jobs that no one else will take, and that they are good for the economy.

This here is anti-thesis to liberals. To save the state they must become what they oppose.

[phill4paul]

I can see your point with the whole party thing. And that's what I've been saying. The ONLY way we can end the problems with immigration is through removing the Welfare State. There is no other way, that's what people need to understand.

We should just stay silent on this issue and keep on focusing on what we've been focusing on.

Vessol the welfare state is only a part of the pie. Trade agreements, federal drug laws are also part of the pie.

LOL. I've read enough of your posts to know that you know this though. ;)

[phill4paul]

No, unemployed people say "they took our jobs". The State tells us they take jobs that no one else will take, and that they are good for the economy.

Exactly. "They" meaning the federal government. Easier to target a group of people that to fault the government.

[heavenlyboy34]

Liberals win. Government expands. Conservatives win. Government expands. Sounds fake to me.

correct.

[peacepotpaul]

just because we want something done about doesn't mean we "blame them".
(and just because we blame somebody for something doesn't mean we want them punished per se)

[EndDaFed]

Yeah, a few hard-workers coming over here is great.. sure.. sounds good.

20+million illegal immigrants, the majority of which are uneducated, and low skilled and have alot of babies. .

Does that mean we get to kick out the red necks too? They fit that profile well.

[peacepotpaul]

Does that mean we get to kick out the red necks too? They fit that profile well.

yes.

unless you're racist, you can't be pro-life but anti-immigrant.

either you believe having babies is good, or you believe more people is bad.

what money and trouble would be save if we kept immigrants out, but pro-life baby factories in operation?

Unless you believe certain babies are of better quality, how can you say that its wrong for immigrants to come, but OK for Americans to breed without proof of education and financial ability?

[EndDaFed]

yes.

unless you're racist, you can't be pro-life but anti-immigrant.

either you believe having babies is good, or you believe more people is bad.

what money and trouble would be save if we kept immigrants out, but pro-life baby factories in operation?

Unless you believe certain babies are of better quality, how can you say that its wrong for immigrants to come, but OK for Americans to breed without proof of education and financial ability?

Red necks also spread disease by not wearing proper protection. We should deport them. They also tend to break the LAW often with their public drunkenness. They are CRIMINALS!

:)

[peacepotpaul]

Red necks also spread disease by not wearing proper protection. We should deport them. They also tend to break the LAW often with their public drunkenness. They are CRIMINALS!

:)

or abort them, whatever works better

[Lord Xar]

Does that mean we get to kick out the red necks too? They fit that profile well.

Not quite. The streets, markets, hospitals, & schools are not overrun with rednecks and their children.

Why rednecks? Try not to be so obvious next time.

[TheTyke]

yes.

unless you're racist, you can't be pro-life but anti-immigrant.

either you believe having babies is good, or you believe more people is bad.

what money and trouble would be save if we kept immigrants out, but pro-life baby factories in operation?

Unless you believe certain babies are of better quality, how can you say that its wrong for immigrants to come, but OK for Americans to breed without proof of education and financial ability?

This is incredibly illogical. No one is advocating killing immigrants and taking away their right to life. We do however, support eventual removal of the welfare state which can be bled by practically anyone.

[bobbyw24]

Yeah--like the Libertarian Party matters.

[Southron]

The issue here is not on the ends but at the means. The means of letting people with no tradition of limited government to out vote the natives who are already having hard time limiting it is a recepie for disaster.

Just from a logistics point of view for libertarian ideology that is relatively in exile in America to side with a side that represents none of it's core values is suicide.


This is what everyone misses. Libertarian ideology is not the natural state of the world. The history of the world is tyranny.

If we have a hard time educating our own populace about liberty, even with our limited government past, then imagine the difficulty in educating those who weren't taught to revere the Constitution.

And in the meantime, they will all have the right to vote and likely continue to elect the same kind of people they did in their homelands.

By allowing everyone the right to vote, you give everyone authority over your life.

I am convinced if we ever get a libertarian utopia then it will necessarily be guarded selfishly to maintain it.

[stu2002]

Libertarians are stupid when it comes to immigration--they fail to see that unlimited 3rd world immigration will lead to more globalization, the end of the nation-state and the total loss of their beloved liberty.

[LibertyEagle]

Founding Fathers Were Immigration Skeptics
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
07/20/2007


The American people continue to be involved in a long-overdue national discussion of immigration. And yet, during the debate over the immigration bill that recently died in the Senate, I do not recall hearing the views of the Founding Fathers -- even if only out of curiosity -- considered, pursued or even raised.

Contrary to what most Americans may believe, in fact, the Founding Fathers were by and large skeptical of immigration. If the United States lacked people with particular skills, then the Founders had no objection to attracting them from abroad. But they were convinced that mass immigration would bring social turmoil and political confusion in its wake.

In one of the most neglected sections of his Notes on Virginia, Thomas Jefferson posed the question, “Are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected by a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners?”

What was likely to happen, according to Jefferson, was that immigrants would come to America from countries that would have given them no experience living in a free society. They would bring with them the ideas and principles of the governments they left behind --ideas and principles that were often at odds with American liberty.

“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?” Jefferson asked. “If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”


read the rest.... (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21626)

[stu2002]

Founding Fathers Were Immigration Skeptics
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
07/20/2007


The American people continue to be involved in a long-overdue national discussion of immigration. And yet, during the debate over the immigration bill that recently died in the Senate, I do not recall hearing the views of the Founding Fathers -- even if only out of curiosity -- considered, pursued or even raised.

Contrary to what most Americans may believe, in fact, the Founding Fathers were by and large skeptical of immigration. If the United States lacked people with particular skills, then the Founders had no objection to attracting them from abroad. But they were convinced that mass immigration would bring social turmoil and political confusion in its wake.

In one of the most neglected sections of his Notes on Virginia, Thomas Jefferson posed the question, “Are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected by a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners?”

What was likely to happen, according to Jefferson, was that immigrants would come to America from countries that would have given them no experience living in a free society. They would bring with them the ideas and principles of the governments they left behind --ideas and principles that were often at odds with American liberty.

“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?” Jefferson asked. “If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”


read the rest.... (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21626)

Right on.

[Brian4Liberty]

Founding Fathers Were Immigration Skeptics
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
07/20/2007


The American people continue to be involved in a long-overdue national discussion of immigration. And yet, during the debate over the immigration bill that recently died in the Senate, I do not recall hearing the views of the Founding Fathers -- even if only out of curiosity -- considered, pursued or even raised.

Contrary to what most Americans may believe, in fact, the Founding Fathers were by and large skeptical of immigration. If the United States lacked people with particular skills, then the Founders had no objection to attracting them from abroad. But they were convinced that mass immigration would bring social turmoil and political confusion in its wake.

In one of the most neglected sections of his Notes on Virginia, Thomas Jefferson posed the question, “Are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected by a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners?”

What was likely to happen, according to Jefferson, was that immigrants would come to America from countries that would have given them no experience living in a free society. They would bring with them the ideas and principles of the governments they left behind --ideas and principles that were often at odds with American liberty.

“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?” Jefferson asked. “If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”


read the rest.... (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21626)

The Toms have some good points... :)

[peacepotpaul]

This is incredibly illogical. No one is advocating killing immigrants and taking away their right to life. We do however, support eventual removal of the welfare state which can be bled by practically anyone.

so you support passive killing by starvation, rather than active killing by injection?

[peacepotpaul]

In one of the most neglected sections of his Notes on Virginia, Thomas Jefferson posed the question, “Are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected by a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners?”

What was likely to happen, according to Jefferson, was that immigrants would come to America from countries that would have given them no experience living in a free society. They would bring with them the ideas and principles of the governments they left behind --ideas and principles that were often at odds with American liberty.

“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?” Jefferson asked. “If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”


read the rest.... (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=21626)

:eek:

what happened to all men are created equal?
people have ideas, cultures and principles attached to them "at odds"?
How is that not racist?

[stu2002]

:eek:

what happened to all men are created equal?
people have ideas, cultures and principles attached to them "at odds"?
How is that not racist?

Based on belief systems, not race, bro.

Your posts are inane. Are you a plant? Troll?

[peacepotpaul]

Based on belief systems, not race, bro.

Your posts are inane. Are you a plant? Troll?

belief systems?
how can people have differing belief systems or human nature if they were created equal?
is there belief system nurture (and can be changed?)
besides, who are we to say our system is better?

[Brian Defferding]

Once again the Libertarian Party swings and misses big time about immigration. I think most people aren't opposed to immigration itself, the issue is ILLEGAL immigrants. I haven't heard anyone complaining about the legal immigrants, but then the LP starts arguing like liberals, claiming that people resent immigrants in general.

Mexico needs to clean itself up, so it isn't such a crap hole that people want to escape from.

Of course ending the insane War on Drugs would be a start.

Well the issue is the degree of difficulty in the immigration process, which is currently outdated and often bulky/confusing, plus the INS could have been updated for a more efficient system years ago but they turned it down because they were hooked on fees.

A simple and easy solution here is allow peaceful immigrants through with little difficulty. Let them be citizens easier. If we are a global economy, the best step to make is allowing anyone to come in and work here. That is what the Libertarian Party supports, as do I. If they do, and people are claiming immigrants are "sucking the system dry, " then it would make sense that the problem is the system itself, not necessarily the immigrants.

[RM918]

belief systems?
how can people have differing belief systems or human nature if they were created equal?
is there belief system nurture (and can be changed?)
besides, who are we to say our system is better?

...this is absurd. You may as well say that no-one is equal because we do not all listen to bluegrass. 'Equal' does not mean 'Identical'.