Page 1 of 19 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 544

Thread: Must Libertarians Believe in Open Borders?

  1. #1

    Default Must Libertarians Believe in Open Borders?

    We are where we are. Either mass-immigration must be stopped with the means currently at hand, or it will not be stopped. This means passports and visas, and agencies empowered to seek out and return those who slip through the first line of immigration control. Where the refugees in Calais are concerned, it means deporting them to the last non-European country they left, and making sure that no more of them are allowed to reach the northern shores of the Mediterranean.

    This is, I hasten to add, only part of the solution. Our governments must also stop turning much of the Third World into slagheaps soaked in human blood. They must stop veering between support of local tyrants and their more recent insistence on forms of government inappropriate to actual conditions. They must, so far as possible, leave other peoples to work out their own destinies in their own ways. This will, I have no doubt, reduce the outward push behind the migrants. Even so, we must secure our own borders.

    Now, for many of those libertarians who accept the existence of a problem, this solution is itself a problem. An ideology that cannot be followed in extreme cases must be a false ideology. If the non-aggression principle is not to be consistently applied, is it worth applying at all?

    I appreciate the difficulty. At the same time, it is a manufactured difficulty. It would not have been recognised as a difficulty by most of our intellectual ancestors. If many libertarians, when they think about mass-immigration, are now beginning to look like scared ostriches, or the more double-joined Indian fakirs, this is not because of any defect in the libertarian fundamentals. It is because, over the past few decades, libertarianism has been re-interpreted in ways that part company with reality. To be specific, the non-aggression principle has been raised from something to be desired within circumstantial constraints to an abstract and absolute imperative. If the only legitimate use of force is to protect individual rights, all other uses of force are illegitimate, and must be rejected out of hand by libertarians.

    Let us consider how distant this imperative is from reality.
    more....
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Nope, the NAP is the only MUST.

  4. #3

    Default

    I believe in moderately strong borders.

  5. #4

    Default

    Open borders is what those working toward a one world government would like to see.

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Nope, the NAP is the only MUST.
    But, then again, you WANT the country to fall.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    But, then again, you WANT the country to fall.
    ...Yes? Is that all you need? Confirmation that I don't give a rat's ass about the blood-soaked false hope that is the United States?

    If you stop drying your eyes with the flag for a second and recognize that a lot of us have no allegiance to the state, maybe our position would make more sense.

    But that would require you to snap out of your Stockholm Syndrome.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    But, then again, you WANT the country to fall.
    Thing is, it won't fail the way they think it would. One must look at the reality of the situation and respect the fact there will never be NO government.

  9. #8

    Default

    I don't think its the immigrants that people are really angry about. Its economic inequality perpetrated by the system. We have a cradle to grave system that is designed to manufacture human beings for use by government and business (youtube: "John Taylor Gatto"). I think immigration is more free than our economic system. I think they should be in balance otherwise doesn't harm come to those who can not game the system thus violating the no harm principle? Isn't that what people are really angry about?

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    ...Yes? Is that all you need? Confirmation that I don't give a rat's ass about the blood-soaked false hope that is the United States?

    If you stop drying your eyes with the flag for a second and recognize that a lot of us have no allegiance to the state, maybe our position would make more sense.

    But that would require you to snap out of your Stockholm Syndrome.
    No, I know some of you don't. And in my opinion, that puts you in the same bucket as the globalist traitors who are doing everything in their power to bring the country down.

    Just making sure everyone else knows where some of you stand and what you are about. Even Lew Rockwell thinks those of you who believe this way are dumbasses.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Thing is, it won't fail the way they think it would. One must look at the reality of the situation and respect the fact there will never be NO government.
    True. That is why they are useful idiots.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  12. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    True. That is why they are useful idiots.
    Yes, the vacuum of anarchy just sucks in another form of government. One can learn from history that anarchy doesn't last very long. Even an anarchist who wishes to maintain anarchy and fights to keep it, would become the government they despise.

  13. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    No, I know some of you don't. And in my opinion, that puts you in the same bucket as the globalist traitors who are doing everything in their power to bring the country down.
    You don't post about liberty here. You don't post about freedom.
    All you ever post about is how the country is being brought down.
    You don't fear the county that would come in after. You fear losing the county you have.
    If you concentrated on liberty, and not the flag, then we might have hope of getting liberty after a collapse.
    But you're double barring the door of your cage, and the only reason you do this is because it's your cage.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    You don't post about liberty here. You don't post about freedom.
    All you ever post about is how the country is being brought down.
    You don't fear the county that would come in after. You fear losing the county you have.
    If you concentrated on liberty, and not the flag, then we might have hope of getting liberty after a collapse.
    But you're double barring the door of your cage, and the only reason you do this is because it's your cage.
    Maybe some feel it's better to try to fix what we already have, rather than hope we get something better from the rubble of a collapse.

  15. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    You don't post about liberty here. You don't post about freedom.
    All you ever post about is how the country is being brought down.
    You don't fear the county that would come in after. You fear losing the county you have.
    If you concentrated on liberty, and not the flag, then we might have hope of getting liberty after a collapse.
    But you're double barring the door of your cage, and the only reason you do this is because it's your cage.
    Because it's dumb as dirt to believe that if the country fell, that we would be allowed to rebuild it from the ashes. Don't you get that the globalists WANT the country to fall? They have espoused it in their books, speeches, etc., yet here you are doing your best to help them. When the country falls, we will be ushered into world government. If you think it's bad now and you cannot see a way through, imagine how you will work with that crap.

    I don't like the situation we are in any better than you do. But, I damn sure don't want to take 100 steps backward and make our path IMPOSSIBLE.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  16. #15
    Account Restricted. Admin to review account standing


    Posts
    31,267
    Join Date
    Aug 2010

    Default

    If you are against the drug war, you must want everyone to do drugs.

  17. #16

    Default

    I believe in open borders, but I also believe in national sovereignty and the right to self defense. So, it's a fluid position for me. We all recognize that the real solution is to end the welfare state and stop military adventurism, which are really the cause for the "border issue."
    Sanity Check Radio Show
    http://www.SanityCheckRadioShow.com

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by groverblue View Post
    I believe in open borders, but I also believe in national sovereignty and the right to self defense. So, it's a fluid position for me. We all recognize that the real solution is to end the welfare state and stop military adventurism, which are really the cause for the "border issue."
    And the horrible trade deals.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    And the horrible trade deals.
    Yeah, the wind is still blowing to the south, and taking jobs with it.

  20. #19

    Default

    Depends on what you mean by libertarians. And what you mean by borders.

  21. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    No, I know some of you don't. And in my opinion, that puts you in the same bucket as the globalist traitors who are doing everything in their power to bring the country down.

    Just making sure everyone else knows where some of you stand and what you are about. Even Lew Rockwell thinks those of you who believe this way are dumbasses.
    You are an authoritarian so I don't really understand what your problem is with a one world government.

    Is it because you are worried that your postcards won't be delivered to your leaders? (Leaders who don't give a $#@! about what you think regardless)
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  22. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    Even Lew Rockwell thinks those of you who believe this way are dumbasses.
    Yet Lew Rockwell is an anarchist who does not reject the NAP, as the OP article implies he must.
    (Nor does this necessarily constitute a contradiction on Rockwell's part.)

    And just for the record (so that no one makes a mistaken assumption about what my position on this matter is), I do not take either side of the so-called "open borders" issue. I understand and am sympathetic to the concerns and arguments on both sides of the debate. But within the context of a statist system, there is no viable solution to the problem. Indeed, such problems only manifest as "problems" in the first place because of the nature of the statist systems in which they occur.

    To clarify what I mean by this, consider the analogous "problem" of whether evolution or creationism (or both, or neither, or something else) ought to be taught in so-called "public" schools. This "problem" only exists due to the "publicness" of those schools, with all the things that are necessarily and unavoidably involved with that "publicness" - things such as mandatory attendance laws or the forcible extraction of funding from those who do not agree with whatever is being taught (not to mention the extraction of such funding from those who do not even have any children at all). No matter what "side" of the "evolution vs. creationism in public schools" issue one might take, someone's gonna get screwed. The problem here is not with "evolution" or "creationism," but with "public schools" as such - thus, so long as the context remains that of "public" schools, it comes down to a matter of "pick your poison." The only genuinely viable solution is to remove the issue entirely from the "public" sphere and place it where it belongs - in the realm of individual choice and private property. And likewise for immigration ...

    So long as immigration remains a "public" issue in the context of a statist system, there can be no "solution" that isn't just as problematic as the "problem" it supposedly addresses. The "open borders" side of the issue involves the exacerbation of an already bloated and over-burdened welfare system, the dilution of social cohesion, and the further empowerment of the forces of political progressivism (among other things). The opposing side of the issue involves (among other things) systematic and extensive interferences in the economy (requiring, as it does, the policing of employer-employee relations, to give just one example) and the reinforcement, amplificiation and aggravation of the problems associated with an already overweening "security" state ("Papers, please!"). So once again, it comes down to a matter of "pick your poison."

    The only genuinely viable solution to the immigration "problem" is to remove the immigration issue entirely from the "public" sphere of "open borders vs. state controls" and place it where it belongs - in the realm of individual choice and private property (where "borders" may be as "open" or "closed" as the owners want them to be). This is, essentially, the Hoppean position on immigration (without Hoppe's concessions to "public" property, which I regard as problematic - in short, just as I am opposed to "public schools," I am also opposed to "public immigration," regardless of whether it involves more immigration or less).

    Now, you may object that such a solution is not very likely to be implemented any time soon - and if so, I freely acknowledge that you are probably correct. I don't think that it's very likely, either - at least not under present circumstances. But that does not mean that I am incorrect - it merely means that under present circumstances, no satisfactory resolution of the issue is possible. (This absence of the possiblity of satisfactory solutions is a hallmark of the state. An inherent characteristic of all states is that they usurp the rightful authority of individuals to exercise their property rights in order to resolve ostensible "problems" via mutual, non-violent cooperation - and democratic states especially thrive on the artificial divisions that are fostered and encouraged by such usurpations. The immigration "debate" in America is a perfect example of this.)

  23. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rad View Post
    I don't think its the immigrants that people are really angry about. Its economic inequality perpetrated by the system. We have a cradle to grave system that is designed to manufacture human beings for use by government and business (youtube: "John Taylor Gatto"). I think immigration is more free than our economic system. I think they should be in balance otherwise doesn't harm come to those who can not game the system thus violating the no harm principle? Isn't that what people are really angry about?
    They do a very good job of hiding it behind threads about being annoyed that people are speaking Spanish and not assimilating into "American Culture."
    Genuine, willful, aggressive ignorance is the one sure way to tick me off. I wish I could say you were trolling. I know better, and it's just sad.

  24. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    ...Yes? Is that all you need? Confirmation that I don't give a rat's ass about the blood-soaked false hope that is the United States?

    If you stop drying your eyes with the flag for a second and recognize that a lot of us have no allegiance to the state, maybe our position would make more sense.

    But that would require you to snap out of your Stockholm Syndrome.
    But doesn't that make you an Anarchist, or a freedomist or whatever.....as opposed to a constitutionalist Libertarian?
    * Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

    * No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

    * Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

    * End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.




    Reprinted from http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/ [Nov. 29, 2011]

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MelissaWV View Post
    They do a very good job of hiding it behind threads about being annoyed that people are speaking Spanish and not assimilating into "American Culture."
    I deal with those people every day in my job and I freaking hate them. Move to France and don't learn French, and you'll get much the same reception.
    Last edited by angelatc; 12-25-2015 at 04:33 PM.
    * Enforce Border Security – America should be guarding her own borders and enforcing her own laws instead of policing the world and implementing UN mandates.

    * No Amnesty - The Obama Administration’s endorsement of so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform,” granting amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants, will only encourage more law-breaking.

    * Abolish the Welfare State – Taxpayers cannot continue to pay the high costs to sustain this powerful incentive for illegal immigration. As Milton Friedman famously said, you can’t have open borders and a welfare state.

    * End Birthright Citizenship – As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be granted U.S. citizenship, we’ll never be able to control our immigration problem.




    Reprinted from http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/immigration/ [Nov. 29, 2011]

  26. #25

    Default

    I don't want to turn this into yet another interminable argument over anarchism, but since you brought it up (), I would like to make just a few brief observations:

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    Yes, the vacuum of anarchy just sucks in another form of government. [...] Even an anarchist who wishes to maintain anarchy and fights to keep it, would become the government they despise.
    If by "government" you mean anything like "a group of people that coercively maintains a monopoly on the use and application of force, and which seeks to exert sole and exclusive authority to adjudge all other uses and applications of force," then none of what you said here necessarily follows.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.3D View Post
    One can learn from history that anarchy doesn't last very long.
    One could as easily say the same regarding "limited" or "minimal" states - and to as little effect.

    All historical situations are composed of unique constellations of myriad contingencies.

    Thus, history does not and cannot "prove" anything regarding the alleged non-viability of anarchy, minarchy, maxarchy or whatever-archy.

  27. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    You are an authoritarian so I don't really understand what your problem is with a one world government.
    I am, am I? lol. I'm not a libertine, no. I believe people should be responsible for their actions.

    Is it because you are worried that your postcards won't be delivered to your leaders? (Leaders who don't give a $#@! about what you think regardless)
    I believe in a very small, limited government. If in your mind, that is an authoritarian, I guess that means you are a pie in the sky anarchist.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  28. #27

    Default

    I don't mind open borders. It's the nanny state I despise. End the nanny state, equalize relations with our neighbors so we can retire in Mexico if we want, and then open the gates.

    I will not support any kind of open borders, or much immigration at all until the nanny state ends.
    "There are two freedoms - the false, where a man is free to do what he likes; the true, where he is free to do what he ought."~~Charles Kingsley

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MelissaWV View Post
    They do a very good job of hiding it behind threads about being annoyed that people are speaking Spanish and not assimilating into "American Culture."
    I agree there is fear of change in there. I think a lot of it is fear of competition for the menial task that America's corporate masters hand out. What options do they have but to compete for those jobs? I maybe wrong and the root of the problem may be more racism instead of anger from economic inequality due to a rigged system. There is a lot of lashing out and the illegal immigrants have suffered at the hands of Empire. If they don't want immigrants to come they would get rid of corporate friendly trade deals such as NATO. That is something the left and right could get behind. It is far too easy to blame "the other" and scapegoat them for what the American people time and time again voted for with money and ballots.

    "Ignorance leads to fear, fear leads to hate, and hate leads to violence. This is the equation." - Averroes. Does this make Yoda Islamic?

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MelissaWV View Post
    They do a very good job of hiding it behind threads about being annoyed that people are speaking Spanish and not assimilating into "American Culture."
    So, Americans should want people entering the country illegally who have no interest in assimilating or in communicating with other Americans? Gotcha.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  31. #30

    Default

    I love it when people play the race card when Americans stand against the open door to the nanny state.

    What do your neighbors look like? What kind of art is on your walls? Who wrote the books on your shelves?
    "There are two freedoms - the false, where a man is free to do what he likes; the true, where he is free to do what he ought."~~Charles Kingsley

Page 1 of 19 12311 ... LastLast





Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •