PDA

View Full Version : THE Immigration Thread




noxagol
04-29-2010, 07:21 AM
So I have noticed a lot of activity lately concerning immigration, namely arising from the new Arizona law. No thread has really taken a look at immigration as a whole and discussed it. I've attempted to, but I'm pretty sure that it was ignored because it was not in line with the conversation going on in the threads I posted in. I, therefore, have decided to create this thread to address all the various issues I have seen regarding the topic of immigration. I look at it from my anarcho-capitalist view point, which in my opinion the freest system of doing things, which is my goal, maximum freedom for each individual. These issues are in no particular order.

I have no problem with legal immigrants, my issue is with the ones that come here illegally

This is a dumb position to have as the base reasoning is quite horrible. The only reason it is illegal for them to enter is because the government says so. End of story. There are no if's and's or but's about it. If you use this line of reasoning, then you support having to get government's permission to do things, which in turn means you defacto support licensing, permits, needing to get a prescription for medicine, and all the other various permission laws that hamper our lives, because you support needing government permission to do things.

They drain our social systems because they get far more than they pay into the system

This is obvious, but it is not an immigration problem. It is the problem with welfare. This is the logical conclusion of all welfare systems. And illegal immigrants pay almost all taxes anyways, except the ones that get taken out of your paycheck. They pay sales taxes, property taxes, and all the other unavoidable taxes just like you and I. I have no qualms with them avoiding income taxes, FICA, social security, because honestly I don't want to be paying them either!

Secondly, the welfare system was doomed from the start and any honest person would know that. The welfare system is a monstrosity in and of itself and it should be abolished.

They refuse to become Americans and integrate.

So what? If your problem is that they won't become what you want them to become, then you are a horrible person. You're probably one of those pesky neighbors that always complains to the city about everyone's yards and how they aren't up to city code. You should go live in a HOA. You are a tyrant. Get over it. Not everyone is going to be like you.

They come here and vote for more tyranny

This also is not an immigration problem. If the government weren't allowed to be tyrannical, then there would be nothing to vote for. The real issue here is that the government is allowed to do the things it does, so people use it to steal from others. Take away this ability, and you have nothing to fear from anyone wanting to use it in such a way. The issue here is government power, not immigration.

This illegal immigrant killed/raped this person

This also has horrible base reasoning. You are saying that because this person was not prevented from entering this country, this person was harmed, and that if only that person was not allowed in, this person would not have been harmed. This is the same reasoning gun control advocates use to push their agenda. "If only this criminal did not have access to guns, this person would not have been harmed." It's preventative measuring, which flat out does not work. There are only two people who are ever in a position to prevent a crime and that is the victim and the perpetrator. If you want the government to prevent crime, then you want a total police state with mind control abilities. Just look at how expansive the police state here is now and then look at how much crime still goes on. Not to mention the cost to taxpayers and how much poorer it makes everyone.

They steal American jobs and work for slave wages

They steal nothing and they are not slaves. They are simply being competitive in the job market. This is like saying an American that is willing to do a job perfectly fine for $10 and hour steals the jobs from another American that does a perfectly fine job for $20 an hour.

They do not work for slave wages as they are choosing to work for that wage. Slaves do not choose to work, they are FORCED to. If they were not happy with what they were earning, they would demand more.

We are a nation of laws and they are breaking them.

There are only two types of laws: natural law and government dictates. One is good, the other is bad. Natural law says that each man is king of his castle and sets his own rules for his castle, his castle being his property. The other says the law is whatever the government says it is.

The constitution IS just a damn piece of paper and for each instance it is used to restrict government power, it is used a hundred times to expand it. It usurps natural law. It IS an abomination. It was a good idea at the time since people were likely unperceptive to anarchy and felt government was necessary. I'm evolved enough to rule myself and look out for my own interests, I'm sorry if you are not and wish to cling to government dictates.

They seek to take over what they think is Atzlan

This is the only issue that is of real concern and should be dealt with, since it involves actual theft of property. And, when looked at honestly, it IS theirs. At least if they can prove that their ancestors had ownership of it before the Mexican War.

We acquired Arizona, New Mexico, California, and part of Nevada and Colorado from an war. We went there and conquered Mexico City and we FORCED the Mexican government to sell us that land. A forced sale is not valid. It is the same as theft. If you must force someone to sell you something then you are obviously not paying a fair price and have stolen from them the difference of what you force them to pay and what you would have had to pay had you not forced them to accept your number.

I would support any transfer of property to any Mexican that can prove that their ancestor once owned that land before the United States government stole it. I would support this for any American Indian that can prove their ancestor owned a piece of land before the United States government stole it.

Failing proof, however, those Mexicans are just shit out of luck since the burden of proof is on them. And to say that Mexico deserves this land is incorrect as property can only belong to an individual.

Open borders advances the globalist agenda.

No, actually, closed borders advances the globalist agenda. War is the health of the state, which is to say conflict is the health of the state. The more that the ordinary people are pitted against each other, the less they are united against the tyranny of the state. Without this immigration dispute, we would not be having biometric ID cards forced upon us, which I'm sure anyone would agree is a goal of the globalist agenda.

They know how most people will react to things, and I think that everyone who opposes open borders is actually falling right into their hands.

Of course, this all depends on whether or not a globalist agenda actually exists, which I will not touch upon because that is not the topic of this thread.

They smuggle drugs.

This is only an issue because of the drug war, which is a gross violation of freedom at its face and at its base. It is the government trying to regulate you. All the violence associated with the drug trade, the gangs, and what have you, are all a result of drugs being illegal. It is the same case as during prohibition. Repeal the drug war and this will go away very fast.

Conclusion
I'm sure there are other issues I have missed, and please feel free to bring them to my attention so that I may address them here, in the first post for all to see. Please be civil, I think that I have been civil so I ask your respect and return it in kind. If you are vile, I will simply ignore you. I also ask that you consider my reasoning, which may or may not make sense as written because I often fail to put into words my thoughts, for whatever reason. Look at the line of reasoning logically with your head and not with your heart. Emotions often cloud the real, honest, and fair result.

Thank you for your time and please remain civil.

FrankRep
04-29-2010, 07:23 AM
The Immigration Question (http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html)


Ron Paul
April 4, 2006


The recent immigration protests in Los Angeles have brought the issue to the forefront, provoking strong reactions from millions of Americans. The protesters’ cause of open borders is not well served when they drape themselves in Mexican flags and chant slogans in Spanish. If anything, their protests underscore the Balkanization of America caused by widespread illegal immigration. How much longer can we maintain huge unassimilated subgroups within America, filled with millions of people who don’t speak English or participate fully in American life? Americans finally have decided the status quo is unacceptable, and immigration may be the issue that decides the 2008 presidential election.

We’re often reminded that America is a nation of immigrants, implying that we’re coldhearted to restrict immigration in any way. But the new Americans reaching our shores in the late 1800s and early 1900s were legal immigrants. In many cases they had no chance of returning home again. They maintained their various ethnic and cultural identities, but they also learned English and embraced their new nationality.

Today, the overwhelming majority of Americans – including immigrants – want immigration reduced, not expanded. The economic, cultural, and political situation was very different 100 years ago.

We’re often told that immigrants do the jobs Americans won’t do, and sometimes this is true. But in many instances illegal immigrants simply increase the supply of labor in a community, which lowers wages. And while cheap labor certainly benefits the economy as a whole, when calculating the true cost of illegal immigration we must include the cost of social services that many new immigrants consume – especially medical care.

We must reject amnesty for illegal immigrants in any form. We cannot continue to reward lawbreakers and expect things to get better. If we reward millions who came here illegally, surely millions more will follow suit. Ten years from now we will be in the same position, with a whole new generation of lawbreakers seeking amnesty.

Amnesty also insults legal immigrants, who face years of paperwork and long waits to earn precious American citizenship.

Birthright citizenship similarly rewards lawbreaking, and must be stopped. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the perverse incentive to sneak into this country remains strong. Citizenship involves more than the mere location of one’s birth. True citizenship requires cultural connections and an allegiance to the United States. Americans are happy to welcome those who wish to come here and build a better life for themselves, but we rightfully expect immigrants to show loyalty and attempt to assimilate themselves culturally. Birthright citizenship sometimes confers the benefits of being American on people who do not truly embrace America.

We need to allocate far more resources, both in terms of money and manpower, to securing our borders and coastlines here at home. This is the most critical task before us, both in terms of immigration problems and the threat of foreign terrorists. Unless and until we secure our borders, illegal immigration and the problems associated with it will only increase.


SOURCE:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul314.html



JBS Speakers Tour - Stealing the American Dream: How Illegal Immigration Affects You
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=237554


John McManus on the Illegal Immigration Invasion


John McManus, President of the John Birch Society (http://www.jbs.org/), explains our current open borders policy and how continued unrestricted immigration threatens our nations future and independence.

Jack McManus on the Immigration Invasion (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8777665565344843988&hl=en#)

noxagol
04-29-2010, 07:26 AM
We must reject amnesty for illegal immigrants in any form.

Amnesty for a violation of a non-law is something I support. I'm sure most here would support amnesty for all the people in prison who are non-violent drug offenders.


Amnesty also insults legal immigrants, who face years of paperwork and long waits to earn precious American citizenship.

I wouldn't be insulted, I would hit myself on the forehead and say 'doh!', for not doing something the easy way. And so what if it insults them.


Birthright citizenship similarly rewards lawbreaking, and must be stopped.

Citizenship is nothing more than government recognition of a subject. I am not a citizen of the United States, I am simply me.

And remember, it is only illegal because the government says so. If the government were to say that there are no longer immigration requirements or quotas and that anyone and everyone could come here legally, would you support this then since there would be no such thing as illegal immigrants?

And just because Ron Paul says something doesn't mean it is the best freedom position.

sevin
04-29-2010, 07:35 AM
If you have no problem with illegal immigrants and think they all deserve amnesty, then should we just erase the border and become the NAU? Better yet, how about a one world government? That would solve everything.

noxagol
04-29-2010, 07:36 AM
If you have no problem with illegal immigrants and think they all deserve amnesty, then should we just erase the border and become the NAU? Better yet, how about a one world government? That would solve everything.

No, I'd rather have 7 billion governments.

orenbus
04-29-2010, 07:38 AM
Not sure if anyone has posted this video yet, a interesting comment Ron Paul made at 7:40

YouTube - RON PAUL 101 - IMMIGRATION (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfJFcSF80dE)

Here is a quote from Ron Paul during the 2008 campaign ABC debates, for those that can't load the video:


"I get a little bit worried when we talk about the tamper proof ID for Illegals or Immigrants because how do you do that? Anybody that is an immigrant or looks like an immigrant would have to have an ID and then you can't discriminate so then everybody is going to have to have the ID. I think it's opening the door for the national ID, we should be very very careful about that."

And at 5:08


"Because of our economic conditions we do need workers, but if we had a truely free market economy the illegal immigrats would not be the scapegoat. We would probably need them and they would be acceptable, but because of the economic conditions they have become the scapegoat."

Southron
04-29-2010, 07:53 AM
They more than likely do come here and vote for more tyranny. Are you in favor of taking away the ability to vote?

You MUST do that or we will never accomplish your ancap goals.

The best example I can think is this: We are in a ship that is taking on water. It has sprung quite a few leaks. Shouldn't we repair the leaks before we start putting more passengers aboard?

JP2010
04-29-2010, 07:56 AM
I have no problem with legal immigrants, my issue is with the ones that come here illegally

This is a dumb position to have as the base reasoning is quite horrible. The only reason it is illegal for them to enter is because the government says so. End of story. There are no if's and's or but's about it. If you use this line of reasoning, then you support having to get government's permission to do things, which in turn means you defacto support licensing, permits, needing to get a prescription for medicine, and all the other various permission laws that hamper our lives, because you support needing government permission to do things.
Your opinion does not equal fact, no matter how much you wish it to be.



They drain our social systems because they get far more than they pay into the system

This is obvious, but it is not an immigration problem. It is the problem with welfare. This is the logical conclusion of all welfare systems. And illegal immigrants pay almost all taxes anyways, except the ones that get taken out of your paycheck. They pay sales taxes, property taxes, and all the other unavoidable taxes just like you and I. I have no qualms with them avoiding income taxes, FICA, social security, because honestly I don't want to be paying them either!

Secondly, the welfare system was doomed from the start and any honest person would know that. The welfare system is a monstrosity in and of itself and it should be abolished.
Maybe we should tighten border security and then fix the welfare system. I'm for that. :D

Illegals may pay sales taxes, property taxes, etc, but they don't pay the same as you and me. So, in essence, they have broken our laws, get away with it, and as punishment they pay less in taxes but receive the same amount, if not more, benefits.



They refuse to become Americans and integrate.

So what? If your problem is that they won't become what you want them to become, then you are a horrible person. You're probably one of those pesky neighbors that always complains to the city about everyone's yards and how they aren't up to city code. You should go live in a HOA. You are a tyrant. Get over it. Not everyone is going to be like you.
The only argument even remotely close to what you've presented is people's complaints about how some immigrants refuse to learn English. Since they refuse, we have to hire bilingual teachers, at almost 50% more than teachers that don't speak a foreign language, in order to teach their children. How do teachers get paid? Property taxes.

Gee, I wonder why people want those that come here to integrate?



They come here and vote for more tyranny

This also is not an immigration problem. If the government weren't allowed to be tyrannical, then there would be nothing to vote for. The real issue here is that the government is allowed to do the things it does, so people use it to steal from others. Take away this ability, and you have nothing to fear from anyone wanting to use it in such a way. The issue here is government power, not immigration.

The topic is illegals, not immigrants. Immigration is good, else you end up like Japan, where there will be more 70+ population than 20+ here soon.

Illegals are a different matter entirely.



This illegal immigrant killed/raped this person

This also has horrible base reasoning. You are saying that because this person was not prevented from entering this country, this person was harmed, and that if only that person was not allowed in, this person would not have been harmed. This is the same reasoning gun control advocates use to push their agenda. "If only this criminal did not have access to guns, this person would not have been harmed." It's preventative measuring, which flat out does not work. There are only two people who are ever in a position to prevent a crime and that is the victim and the perpetrator. If you want the government to prevent crime, then you want a total police state with mind control abilities. Just look at how expansive the police state here is now and then look at how much crime still goes on. Not to mention the cost to taxpayers and how much poorer it makes everyone.

Uh, yes? If the rapist wasn't in the country, how would the rape have occurred? Your argument about inanimate object versus people is laughable.



They steal American jobs and work for slave wages

They steal nothing and they are not slaves. They are simply being competitive in the job market. This is like saying an American that is willing to do a job perfectly fine for $10 and hour steals the jobs from another American that does a perfectly fine job for $20 an hour.

They do not work for slave wages as they are choosing to work for that wage. Slaves do not choose to work, they are FORCED to. If they were not happy with what they were earning, they would demand more.

They can be more competitive because they are not subject to the same taxes we are because *drumroll* they are undocumented and their employer can get away with paying them cash!



We are a nation of laws and they are breaking them.

There are only two types of laws: natural law and government dictates. One is good, the other is bad. Natural law says that each man is king of his castle and sets his own rules for his castle, his castle being his property. The other says the law is whatever the government says it is.

The constitution IS just a damn piece of paper and for each instance it is used to restrict government power, it is used a hundred times to expand it. It usurps natural law. It IS an abomination. It was a good idea at the time since people were likely unperceptive to anarchy and felt government was necessary. I'm evolved enough to rule myself and look out for my own interests, I'm sorry if you are not and wish to cling to government dictates.

What does the Constitution say about protecting our borders?
Oh, and the Constitution is not an abomination; glad to see where you stand.



They seek to take over what they think is Atzlan

This is the only issue that is of real concern and should be dealt with, since it involves actual theft of property. And, when looked at honestly, it IS theirs. At least if they can prove that their ancestors had ownership of it before the Mexican War.

We acquired Arizona, New Mexico, California, and part of Nevada and Colorado from an war. We went there and conquered Mexico City and we FORCED the Mexican government to sell us that land. A forced sale is not valid. It is the same as theft. If you must force someone to sell you something then you are obviously not paying a fair price and have stolen from them the difference of what you force them to pay and what you would have had to pay had you not forced them to accept your number.

I would support any transfer of property to any Mexican that can prove that their ancestor once owned that land before the United States government stole it. I would support this for any American Indian that can prove their ancestor owned a piece of land before the United States government stole it.

Failing proof, however, those Mexicans are just shit out of luck since the burden of proof is on them. And to say that Mexico deserves this land is incorrect as property can only belong to an individual.

It is not theirs.

If you're not a hypocrite, then give your house to your local tribe, Navajo, Seminole, what have you, and leave this country. After all, it is rightfully theirs, not yours.

I suppose you believe in paying for the crimes of your father, too? Completely idiotic.



Open borders advances the globalist agenda.

No, actually, closed borders advances the globalist agenda. War is the health of the state, which is to say conflict is the health of the state. The more that the ordinary people are pitted against each other, the less they are united against the tyranny of the state. Without this immigration dispute, we would not be having biometric ID cards forced upon us, which I'm sure anyone would agree is a goal of the globalist agenda.

They know how most people will react to things, and I think that everyone who opposes open borders is actually falling right into their hands.

Of course, this all depends on whether or not a globalist agenda actually exists, which I will not touch upon because that is not the topic of this thread.

So, the solution you are presenting, is to remove all borders and there will be no global government at that point?



They smuggle drugs.

This is only an issue because of the drug war, which is a gross violation of freedom at its face and at its base. It is the government trying to regulate you. All the violence associated with the drug trade, the gangs, and what have you, are all a result of drugs being illegal. It is the same case as during prohibition. Repeal the drug war and this will go away very fast.

I am against the war on drugs. We're pretty much on the same page here.



Conclusion
I'm sure there are other issues I have missed, and please feel free to bring them to my attention so that I may address them here, in the first post for all to see. Please be civil, I think that I have been civil so I ask your respect and return it in kind. If you are vile, I will simply ignore you. I also ask that you consider my reasoning, which may or may not make sense as written because I often fail to put into words my thoughts, for whatever reason. Look at the line of reasoning logically with your head and not with your heart. Emotions often cloud the real, honest, and fair result.

Thank you for your time and please remain civil.

You're too verbose.

noxagol
04-29-2010, 08:18 AM
Maybe we should tighten border security and then fix the welfare system. I'm for that.

Illegals may pay sales taxes, property taxes, etc, but they don't pay the same as you and me. So, in essence, they have broken our laws, get away with it, and as punishment they pay less in taxes but receive the same amount, if not more, benefits.


The only fixing of welfare is destroying it.

How are they not paying the same as you or I in those taxes?


Your opinion does not equal fact, no matter how much you wish it to be.

How was that an opinion?


The only argument even remotely close to what you've presented is people's complaints about how some immigrants refuse to learn English. Since they refuse, we have to hire bilingual teachers, at almost 50% more than teachers that don't speak a foreign language, in order to teach their children. How do teachers get paid? Property taxes.

Gee, I wonder why people want those that come here to integrate?


Welfare state issue. Get rid of public education and this is a non-problem.


They can be more competitive because they are not subject to the same taxes we are because *drumroll* they are undocumented and their employer can get away with paying them cash!

And if we didn't have to pay taxes, we could earn less while still having the same amount of money brought home that we do now, which will allow everyone else to compete with them.


The topic is illegals, not immigrants. Immigration is good, else you end up like Japan, where there will be more 70+ population than 20+ here soon.

Illegals are a different matter entirely.

They are only illegal because the government says so.


Uh, yes? If the rapist wasn't in the country, how would the rape have occurred? Your argument about inanimate object versus people is laughable.

While the comparison at its face might be laughable, the comparison of lines of thoughts are the same. The person is not a rapist until they commit the rape. Do you wish to have everyone's thought monitored so that the police can stop people before they commit crimes? Do you support pre-crime?


What does the Constitution say about protecting our borders?
Oh, and the Constitution is not an abomination; glad to see where you stand.

Anything that empowers a group of thugs to trample over people and claim it is legitamate is an abomination.


It is not theirs.

If you're not a hypocrite, then give your house to your local tribe, Navajo, Seminole, what have you, and leave this country. After all, it is rightfully theirs, not yours.

I suppose you believe in paying for the crimes of your father, too? Completely idiotic.


You equate a nation with a person, which is simply false. The tribe has no claim on land, only the individual that owned the land has claim, just as a nation has no right to claim land, only individuals. And yes, if someone came to me with indisputable proof, I would happily give them back their land as I respect others property.

And no, paying for another person's crimes unvoluntarily I do not support, and you were really reaching with that one.

Nation does not equal individual.


So, the solution you are presenting, is to remove all borders and there will be no global government at that point?

No, I say get rid of all governments and there will be no nation borders. The only borders that will exist are between individuals' properties.


You're too verbose.

Required as this is a touchy subject and people often explode at you for disagreeing.

pcosmar
04-29-2010, 08:20 AM
http://www.bilerico.com/2009/11/red_herring2.gif

Shouldn't this be ,

The Real ID thread??

noxagol
04-29-2010, 08:22 AM
http://www.bilerico.com/2009/11/red_herring2.gif

Shouldn't this be ,

The Real ID thread??

I fail to see why.

And, speaking of red herrings, that is EXACTLY what illegal immigration is, a red herring. It is used as the blame for failure to distract from the real problem, which is government. All of the problems illegal are blamed for are in fact caused by government.

AuH20
04-29-2010, 08:23 AM
I fail to see why.

And, speaking of red herrings, that is EXACTLY what illegal immigration is, a red herring. It is used as the blame for failure to distract from the real problem, which is government. All of the problems illegal are blamed for are in fact caused by government.

So in other words, stop looking for alternate strategies because the federal government is corrupt?;)

pcosmar
04-29-2010, 08:32 AM
I fail to see why.

.

Then you have blinders on. Immigration (legal or otherwise) is being used to distract from the real issue. And that is CONTROL.
Rex 84 was (supposedly) about illegal immigrants.
The KBR contracts (FEMA detention centers) were allegedly about illegals
Inland Roadblocks=conditioning
Real ID, Biometric tracking, Chips all being "sold" for false reasons.
The issue is CONTROL.
Of us all.

The "illegal" problem is created to sell another agenda.

furface
04-29-2010, 08:32 AM
Amnesty for a violation of a non-law is something I support. I'm sure most here would support amnesty for all the people in prison who are non-violent drug offenders.

Tremendously offensive analogy. Nobody's talking about incarcerating illegal aliens, just sending them back to where they legitimately reside. Illegal aliens are not in prison and comparing them to prisoners delegitimizes the plight of hundreds of thousands of unjustly incarcerated federal prisoners.

Here's the thing. Why don't all the Latino illegals in the US decide where they want to live and go there. They can pick anywhere they want. Just do it and I and other people who want to will go and live away from them.

But of course they don't want to do that because they're basically parasites who can only live in a host society being incapable of creating their own prosperous, sustainable society.

This is about freedom of association. I simply do not like those people and their culture. It's my right to associate with whoever I want.

Brian4Liberty
04-29-2010, 11:40 AM
They drain our social systems because they get far more than they pay into the system

This is obvious, but it is not an immigration problem. It is the problem with welfare.



More immigration of extremely low paid people will make the system even worse. And the reality of making the system "collapse" would be very ugly. We need to fix this first.



They refuse to become Americans and integrate.



And they should come to America and not become Americans?



They come here and vote for more tyranny


That is the voting record.



They steal American jobs and work for slave wages


I subscribe to the theory that the single situation that leads to the most individual freedom and innovation is a labor shortage. Excess labor plays directly into the hands of the Oligarchy, and makes each individual worth less.




We are a nation of laws and they are breaking them.


Some people believe that a minimal number of laws are required. Doesn't make much sense to have them if they are going to be ignored.




They seek to take over what they think is Atzlan


Not all of them!

Granted, some do believe in the La Raza philosophy and reconquista.


And, when looked at honestly, it IS theirs. At least if they can prove that their ancestors had ownership of it before the Mexican War.


Based on what? The nine months of the First Mexican Empire? The twenty five years of loose Mexican control after that?


I would support any transfer of property to any Mexican that can prove that their ancestor once owned that land before the United States government stole it. I would support this for any American Indian that can prove their ancestor owned a piece of land before the United States government stole it.


They are still here, and never left! The law tends to favor the current owner of land... Attempting to go back hundreds of years to determine ownership is very difficult. And where do you stop? The current owner? The owner from 20 years ago? 50 years ago? 100 years ago? Now we are talking about dead people. 200 years? 300 years? 1000 years? 5000 years?



Open borders advances the globalist agenda.

No, actually, closed borders advances the globalist agenda.


So why do TPTB advocate open borders? Some kind of clever reverse psychology? They aren't just advocating it, they are effectively implementing it. If you are a pacifist who opposes nuclear weapons, should you support the push to rid Iran of them? It's good to step away from dogma from time to time and analyze the current situation.



Thank you for your time and please remain civil.

You're welcome, and that's always a good idea! :)

yongrel
04-29-2010, 11:45 AM
All immigration should be legal. The government should have no immigration policy besides "howdy folks!"

If you object, please provide a principled, intellectually consistent reason. It should be free from contradictions. No, "dey took our jarbs!" does not count. Neither does "speak english, dammit!"

John Taylor
04-29-2010, 11:52 AM
All immigration should be legal. The government should have no immigration policy besides "howdy folks!"

If you object, please provide a principled, intellectually consistent reason. It should be free from contradictions. No, "dey took our jarbs!" does not count. Neither does "speak english, dammit!"

You're right! Let's allow a billion poorly educated pro-redistributionists move in and vote themselves all of our property, and use our own guns on us when we resist!


Horray!!!! Horray!!!! Horray!!!!

yongrel
04-29-2010, 11:56 AM
You're right! Let's allow a billion poorly educated pro-redistributionists move in and vote themselves all of our property, and use our own guns on us when we resist!


Horray!!!! Horray!!!! Horray!!!!

On what moral authority can you deny somewhat the ability to walk across an imaginary, arbitrary line in the sand (a political border)?

noxagol
04-29-2010, 12:09 PM
Then you have blinders on. Immigration (legal or otherwise) is being used to distract from the real issue. And that is CONTROL.
Rex 84 was (supposedly) about illegal immigrants.
The KBR contracts (FEMA detention centers) were allegedly about illegals
Inland Roadblocks=conditioning
Real ID, Biometric tracking, Chips all being "sold" for false reasons.
The issue is CONTROL.
Of us all.

The "illegal" problem is created to sell another agenda.

Ah yes, we are in agreement. I thought you might be thinking I am creating a red herring to distract from real ID, so I was looking at your statement backwards, for that I apologize.

John Taylor
04-29-2010, 12:10 PM
On what moral authority can you deny somewhat the ability to walk across an imaginary, arbitrary line in the sand (a political border)?

Softball question. The moral authority I possess from being a self-owing individual, and by extension, because of my ownership of my own property. This self-ownership allows me to voluntarily join with other individuals in an attempt to collectively protect our individual liberty, and it gives me the moral authority to exclude from participation in said organization those who advocate using force to redistribute the private property of the individual constituent members!

yongrel
04-29-2010, 12:17 PM
Softball question. The moral authority I possess from being a self-owing individual, and by extension, because of my ownership of my own property. This self-ownership allows me to voluntarily join with other individuals in an attempt to collectively protect our individual liberty, and it gives me the moral authority to exclude from participation in said organization those who advocate using force to redistribute the private property of the individual constituent members!

How does being an individual grant you the power to use force to control how other individuals use their property. You are entitled to keep those horrible foreigners off your lawn, sure. But where do you get off telling me that I cannot welcome them into my home?

I reject the notion that individuals organizing together for the sake of protecting their own property grants them the authority to use force to punish others for what is essentially thoughtcrime. You don't like what the immigrants think (remember, potential immigrants have not acted against you), therefore you wish to use the state (coercion) to deny both native property owners and foreign immigrants their own rights. In this scenario, you are the initiator of aggression. When is that ever ok?

I want to be able to hire an immigrant to work for me, and I want to be able to have them over for dinner. You are using violence disguised as politics to prevent that from happening.

Disgusting.

John Taylor
04-29-2010, 12:22 PM
How does being an individual grant you the power to use force to control how other individuals use their property. You are entitled to keep those horrible foreigners off your lawn, sure. But where do you get off telling me that I cannot welcome them into my home?

I reject the notion that individuals organizing together for the sake of protecting their own property grants them the authority to use force to punish others for what is essentially thoughtcrime. You don't like what the immigrants think (remember, potential immigrants have not acted against you), therefore you wish to use the state (coercion) to deny both native property owners and foreign immigrants their own rights. In this scenario, you are the initiator of aggression. When is that ever ok?

I want to be able to hire an immigrant to work for me, and I want to be able to have them over for dinner. You are using violence disguised as politics to prevent that from happening.

Disgusting.


What is disgusting is your incessant shills for the migration of a billion socialists to this country, without first dismantling the welfare/warfare state (something I notice you decidely remain silent upon). It is precisely such a policy which the redistributionists here favor because it will empower them to exponentially increase the amount of "change we can believe in" as time goes by.

I have no problem with any amount of immigrants, provided they will refrain from violating my rights. We must first dismantle the welfare/warfare state which enables this lamprey-like existence, before bringing in the billion people you desire.

dannno
04-29-2010, 12:22 PM
No, I'd rather have 7 billion governments.

That's my new away msg for gmail :)

yongrel
04-29-2010, 12:24 PM
Interestingly, immigrants didn't create the welfare state; Americans did. Deport all native citizens who don't toe the party line! Only the ideologically acceptable should be allowed to live in America, born here or not.

John Taylor
04-29-2010, 12:26 PM
Interestingly, immigrants didn't create the welfare state; Americans did. Deport all native citizens who don't toe the party line! Only the ideologically acceptable should be allowed to live in America, born here or not.

Toe the party line? You mean people don't have the right to have their rights respected? They don't have a right to assemble and organize themselves for their common defense? Surely you must condemn the "free state project" as the monstrous attempt at self-segregation from the statists it is!!!

How would you constitutionally remove the people who advocate legalized plunder as a policy for government?

dannno
04-29-2010, 12:37 PM
How would you constitutionally remove the people who advocate legalized plunder as a policy for government?

So now you want to send all of the people who voted for Obama (and probably most of the people who voted for McCain) to Mexico :confused:

Sounds like a great idea, I'm not sure where the authority to do that would come from though...

Free Moral Agent
04-29-2010, 12:49 PM
No, I'd rather have 7 billion governments.

aka world anarchy? Thanks for showing your true colors. Well I'll tell you what, how about we first get 310 million (US population) governments. Although, I'm only humoring you of course.

yongrel
04-29-2010, 01:40 PM
aka world anarchy? Thanks for showing your true colors. Well I'll tell you what, how about we first get 310 million (US population) governments. Although, I'm only humoring you of course.

"If the individual has a right to govern himself, all external government is tyranny. Hence the necessity of abolishing the State."
- Benjamin Tucker

John Taylor
04-29-2010, 01:43 PM
So now you want to send all of the people who voted for Obama (and probably most of the people who voted for McCain) to Mexico :confused:

Sounds like a great idea, I'm not sure where the authority to do that would come from though...

I'm not so certain about "SENDING" them anywhere, but if my state of AZ wishes to prevent NON-CITIZEN individuals presently violating the law who overwelmingly support redistribution from residing in the state, and exercise some sovereignty, I'm going to give AZ a chance.