Does a nation-state have the right to limit or restrict immigration?

[Contumacious]

All right genius. I think we are done here.

Proud to be a government school victim?

.

[MallsRGood]

Let 'em into the country until they reach 51% and you'll find out.

How's the current 51% working out for ya?

[nobody's_hero]

How's the current 51% working out for ya?

Brother, I don't even think I have 51% on my side, but I've no inclination of throwing my hands up and letting the rest through the gates.

[Anti Federalist]

...better call Al Gore.

There are lots of bolsheviks out there (of indeterminate gender, apparently), on whose sleeves you could wipe your enviro-tears.

So you think that eliminating regulations and allowing private property owners to sue people who damage their property is "left wing, Al Gore Bolshevism"?

Well, gee whillickers, why do you think Teh Messicuns might be angry at GOPers at the moment?

...must be totally unprovoked.

Can't be like, a reaction to GOPers talking about mass kidnapping and deportation er nuttin...

..nawwwwww

Not sure, they've been at it while, long before Trump and make it abundantly clear, that if they win, white Europeans will be forcibly evicted.

You must be young. I've seen lots of retarded anger over the years. It's usually based in economic problem created by the giant leech sucking us all dry (i.e. the federal government), but with the anger cleverly redirected by agents of said leech (i.e. politicians) who set us (not me, of course) against one another for the purpose of distraction. But, yes, throw out the Messicuns, her der, nevermind that 50% looting tax rate.

LOL - I'm old enough to be your father more than likely, possibly grandfather.

Distraction? If anything I was distracted away from this issue.

Then stop supporting left-liberal clowns like Trump.

And stop allowing such idiots to sucker you into voting for them by "Teh Messicuns Dun Did It Her Derrrr."

I did not support and did not vote for him.

I'm supporting him based on the actions I've seen so far.

[Anti Federalist]

And...?

There are lots of angry mobs.

Is that ^^^ going to actually affect anything in a meaningless way, or is it just FOXPORN?

I think you know the answer.

Yes, because the mobs, combined with that fatalistic apathy you yourself described, lead to this:

ETA - I was going to post some pictures of Mexican cartel murders, but they are, literally, too gruesome.

[MallsRGood]

So you think that eliminating regulations and allowing private property owners to sue people who damage their property is "left wing, Al Gore Bolshevism"?

No, I think that having the state fine/cage people for renting/selling to Mexicans is bolshevism.

Just replace Mexican with kulak.

...point is, it's an egregious violation of private property rights.

Period. There is no possible counterargument.

If you think violating property rights in this instance is good, caging people for non-aggressive acts is good, well okay.

But it is what it is; don't pretend it's anything else.

Not sure, they've been at it while, long before Trump and make it abundantly clear, that if they win, white Europeans will be forcibly evicted.

Yea, forcible eviction is bad...

(therefore, let's forcibly evict people)

I did not support and did not vote for him.

I'm supporting him based on the actions I've seen so far.

Well, when in a few years he $#@!s you to the point that even you cannot ignore it, I will have no sympathy.

That's the end of the story.

[Contumacious]

Grabbing someone, forcing him in a van, driving him to another country, and kicking him out =/= kidnapping?

Shall we just be permitted to do this to one another at will?

Someone does this to you, taking you back to...England, Ireland, Germany, Poland...wherever you're from...

Cool? No crime there? No objections?

American Indians had an extreme vetting immigration policy.

No whites in the black hills.

They were slaughtered like dogs.


.

[timosman]

No, I think that having the state fine/cage people for renting/selling to Mexicans is bolshevism.

Just replace Mexican with kulak.

...point is, it's an egregious violation of private property rights.

Period. There is no possible counterargument.

If you think violating property rights in this instance is good, caging people for non-aggressive acts is good, well okay.

But it is what it is; don't pretend it's anything else.



Yea, forcible eviction is bad...

(therefore, let's forcibly evict people)



Well, when in a few years he $#@!s you to the point that even you cannot ignore it, I will have no sympathy.

That's the end of the story.

WTF is wrong with these people(?)?

[MallsRGood]

Yes, because the mobs, combined with that fatalistic apathy you yourself described, lead to this:

ETA - I was going to post some pictures of Mexican cartel murders, but they are, literally, too gruesome.

Right, and this is obviously because Messicuns R Bad.

It has nothing to do with drug prohibition.

It's not like Italians, for instance, ever behaved this way.

[timosman]

American Indians had an extreme vetting immigration policy.

No whites in the black hills.

They were slaughtered like dogs.


.

They were too naive. Mentality of 12 year olds. Just like open border supporters.

[Contumacious]

They were too naive. Mentality of 12 year olds. Just like open border supporters.

I know who you are .......Charles Manson.

Thought you were dead.

But I recognize the style.

.

[nobody's_hero]

Right, and this is obviously because Messicuns R Bad.

It has nothing to do with drug prohibition.

It's not like Italians, for instance, ever behaved this way.

You're not going to get very far in your arguments if you continue to make everything about race.

I see you arrived in Dec, 2016, and I feel obligated to inform you that many here have tried, and have failed, to make all of their arguments devolve into race-baiting and of those many have either left the forum, or outgrew their immature 'debating' skills and now offer much more substantive arguments based on the issues.

In other words, if all you can come up with is, 'brown people blah blah blah' . . . F*#% off.

[Anti Federalist]

No, I think that having the state fine/cage people for renting/selling to Mexicans is bolshevism.

That's not what you said, but that's OK.

Just replace Mexican with kulak.

You have your analogy bass ackwards.

We are the native Ukraine "kulaks" being forced out of our lands, our customs, our economies and our way of life, at the hands of globalist tyrants, by way of hostile demographic invasion from foreign nations.

If anybody could claim the title of displaced kulak, it would be the American Indians I posted before, that you dismissed as a "silly" proposition.

...point is, it's an egregious violation of private property rights.

Period. There is no possible counterargument.

If you think violating property rights in this instance is good, caging people for non-aggressive acts is good, well okay.

But it is what it is; don't pretend it's anything else.

Well, then, let's not cage anybody.

Build a wall.

Yea, forcible eviction is bad...

(therefore, let's forcibly evict people)

Forcible eviction of a rightful property owner is bad.

Forcible eviction of a criminal squatter is not.

Well, when in a few years he $#@!s you to the point that even you cannot ignore it, I will have no sympathy.

That's the end of the story.

That's nice...I don't recall ever asking for any, however, it is just another display of "tolerance" and "love trumping hate".

Very mild, from what has been unleashed from other sectors.

I'll re-evaluate frequently, have no fear, and will jump on things when he is wrong.

[specsaregood]

LOL @ arguing about the right of a nation/state with a bunch of anarchists.

[Contumacious]

LOL @ arguing about the right of a nation/state with a bunch of anarchists.

Exactly.

That's something the fascists and socialists love to talk about.


.

[Anti Federalist]

Right, and this is obviously because Messicuns R Bad.

It has nothing to do with drug prohibition.

It's not like Italians, for instance, ever behaved this way.

It has a great deal to do with drug prohibition.

That does not change the fact that a large part of the reason for this lies in the political sloth and apathy of the Mexican people, you yourself described.

[cindy25]

yes, but>>>

if a visa is issued, and paid for it should be regarded as a contract. rules shouldn't be changed in the middle of the game.

[Anti Federalist]

LOL @ arguing about the right of a nation/state with a bunch of anarchists.

Well, I figured I'd throw it out there...funny when you think about it, because I "identify" as an anarchist myself.

In that I believe that the time will come where people will be able to live without rulers.

We are far from that point.

[Anti Federalist]

yes, but>>>

if a visa is issued, and paid for it should be regarded as a contract. rules shouldn't be changed in the middle of the game.

Yes, this, very much true.

[timosman]

yes, but>>>

if a visa is issued, and paid for it should be regarded as a contract. rules shouldn't be changed in the middle of the game.

LOL You have no idea what you are talking about. The entry to the country was always a subject to the final approval of the border immigration officials.

[LibertyEagle]

I hate the term "nation state". Isn't that a UN construct?

[UWDude]

Basically, this question is asking if nations should exist. The answer is yes. A borderless planet, with no laws, no government, is utopian fantasy. Nothing less.

[Superfluous Man]

A state doesn't have any rights at all.

A state is wrong the moment it exists.

[Superfluous Man]

Brother, I don't even think I have 51% on my side, but I've no inclination of throwing my hands up and letting the rest through the gates.

You have no right to stop them.

[UWDude]

A state doesn't have any rights at all.

A state is wrong the moment it exists.

There will always be a government. There will never be a utopia of people undivided. People are animals, and tribal by nature.

[Superfluous Man]

Basically, this question is asking if nations should exist. The answer is yes. A borderless planet, with no laws, no government, is utopian fantasy. Nothing less.

So if you don't limit immigration, that means there are no nations, no borders, no laws, and no government?

How do people manage to think this way? There is just no logic to that train of thought.

[Superfluous Man]

There will always be a government. There will never be a utopia of people undivided. People are animals, and tribal by nature.

In the post you quoted I didn't even use the word government.

[timosman]

A state doesn't have any rights at all.

A state is wrong the moment it exists.

GTFO

[LibertyEagle]

You have no right to stop them.

Wrong.

[Superfluous Man]

Well, I figured I'd throw it out there...funny when you think about it, because I "identify" as an anarchist myself.

In that I believe that the time will come where people will be able to live without rulers.

We are far from that point.

I agree that we are far from that point. And I am not optimistic that it will ever arrive.

But that doesn't change the laws of right and wrong.

The poll question is a question of ought, not is.