A Muslim Ban Is Logical, Moral, And Even Libertarian

[Zippyjuan]

Are "Libertarian" and "bans" compatible?

[otherone]

Are "Libertarian" and "bans" compatible?

Sure. If it's a "Libertarian Ban" or "Libertarian Curfew". It has the word "Libertarian" right in it.

[AuH20]

Are "Libertarian" and "bans" compatible?

In 2017, it is. We live in the most liberty hostile period in American History. The federal government is hellbent on replacing the current citizenry with malleable replacements.

[otherone]

In 2017, it is. We live in the most liberty hostile period in American History. The federal government is hellbent on replacing the current citizenry with malleable replacements.

The current citizenry isn't malleable? Half of them are terrified by Climate Change, the other half by Muslims. It's a win-win for Washington.

[AuH20]

The current citizenry isn't malleable? Half of them are terrified by Climate Change, the other half by Muslims. It's a win-win for Washington.

Not malleable enough for their liking. The oligarchs want to ramrod their agenda and the current populace has resisted to a degree. If they bring in the Muslims and Hispanics in large numbers, they could rapidly implement the entire agenda, from gun banning to automatic cars. The whole enchilada could proceed within a very short time period. The desperate dirt people from the nether regions of the world can be bought extremely cheap, in comparison to the spoiled Western counterparts, who have been brought up on the lies of Madison Avenue and who also can remember recent history when the quality of life was superior.

[CaptUSA]

...

So... You didn't really want an answer, then??

Either live under "their" form of authoritarianism or yours? Yeah, I'll keep advocating for individual liberty, thanks.

[otherone]

Not malleable enough for their liking. The oligarchs want to ramrod their agenda and the current populace has resisted to a degree. If they bring in the Muslims and Hispanics in large numbers, they could rapidly implement the entire agenda, from gun banning to automatic cars. The whole enchilada within a very short time period. The desperate dirt people from the nether regions of the world can be bought extremely cheap.

The state relies on the population being at odds with each other. It's pretty basic political science. A united people would be a threat to the power structure.

[timosman]

So... You didn't really want an answer, then??

Either live under "their" form of authoritarianism or yours? Yeah, I'll keep advocating for individual liberty, thanks.

Which bridge do you live under?

[otherone]

So... You didn't really want an answer, then??

Either live under "their" form of authoritarianism or yours? Yeah, I'll keep advocating for individual liberty, thanks.

But Kahless's has funnel cake instead of falafel.

[timosman]

Are "Libertarian" and "bans" compatible?

What are you advocating? Swinging dicks in public?

[kahless]

So... You didn't really want an answer, then??

Either live under "their" form of authoritarianism or yours? Yeah, I'll keep advocating for individual liberty, thanks.

What are you talking about, I responded point by point a few posts above yours, no three dots in any post.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=6549816

Ultimately I see your position as a direct assault on individual liberty in the US since you have no recognition that mass immigration of peoples with opposing ideology will make individual liberty or any form of living in a libertarian like society impossible in our life time.

[otherone]

What are you advocating? Swinging dicks in public?

Is that what freedom means to you?

[Swordsmyth]

Are "Libertarian" and "bans" compatible?

They sure are, even the anarchists want to ban tyrants (or any government at all).

[timosman]

They sure are, even the anarchists want to ban tyrants (or any government at all).

Zippy is a hardcore libertarian.

[enhanced_deficit]

The low hanging fruit first.

If you understand the current power dynamics in America, the low hanging fruit seems to have allied with mid hanging fruits with big pockets. Kushner and Ivanka would not let Trump move too far away from democrats/AIPAC type groups that oppose Islamic refugees admission bans.


Jewish groups pan Trump for signing refugee ban on Holocaust Remembrance Day
By Laura Koran, CNN
January 28, 2017

• The action temporarily blocks entry to citizens from 7 majority-Muslim nations
• One of its most vocal critics is former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright

Washington (CNN)Many organizations that advocate for refugees slammed President Donald Trump's executive action Friday imposing "extreme vetting" on those fleeing to America, among them Jewish groups that took particular exception to the day on which he signed it: Holocaust Remembrance Day.




Muslims-Jews seem to have allied for common interest perhaps, you really think Trump can move against such powerful interests?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Zippy is a hardcore libertarian.

He's a "supporting member." He even says so!

[otherone]

He's a "supporting member." He even says so!

There are a lot of Zippy's here. Some are paid. Some aren't.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

There are a lot of Zippy's here.

Fo sho!

[oyarde]

Are "Libertarian" and "bans" compatible?

I never thought so but I guess banning the Liberty of others to grant mine is something I can learn to live with . If my state banned Illinois from entry or charged a toll and required they return to the craphole they came from I could live with it .

[kahless]

I never thought so but I guess banning the Liberty of others to grant mine is something I can learn to live with . If my state banned Illinois from entry or charged a toll and required they return to the craphole they came from I could live with it .

If you are against a ban I guess you can say you stayed true to some textbook definition of left libertarianism. All the while by doing so moving further away from the ability to experience it in real life. If you support the ban a great many people move closer to experiencing liberty, Paleolibertarianism. I take the later.

[Zippyjuan]

I never thought so but I guess banning the Liberty of others to grant mine is something I can learn to live with . If my state banned Illinois from entry or charged a toll and required they return to the craphole they came from I could live with it .

Real freedoms should apply to everybody. If you agree somebody should have their freedoms restricted you agree that you can/should have some of your freedoms taken too.

[sparebulb]

Real freedoms should apply to everybody. If you agree somebody should have their freedoms restricted you agree that you can/should have some of your freedoms taken too.

This is a preachy rationalization formed in the sound of a fart.

It smells bad too, considering the source.

[Swordsmyth]

Real freedoms should apply to everybody. If you agree somebody should have their freedoms restricted you agree that you can/should have some of your freedoms taken too.

Nobody's freedoms are being restricted, they don't have a right to come here any more than I have right to enter their territory, it is a privilege that can be extended or retracted.

[r3volution 3.0]

Violent Jihad is not an ideology, as our Moderate Muslim friends keep calling it. Jihad is a pillar of a faith. That faith is Islam.

That must explain why 0.0001% of Muslims commit terrorist acts.

Christianity has just commemorated 500 years since its Reformation. Islam has yet to undergo a reformation; it’s still radical.

The Protestant Reformation unleashed huge numbers of violent lunatics, including the ancestors of all modern communists.

Religion is The Risk Factor, not chaotic countries-of-origin

[Thor]

Real freedoms should apply to everybody. If you agree somebody should have their freedoms restricted you agree that you can/should have some of your freedoms taken too.

So then the vehicle in which we allow freedoms (rights for everyone, no matter), is the same vehicle that destroys freedom.

C'est la vie... It is as it should be. Stop fighting against the state, it is inevitable.

[Swordsmyth]

That must explain why 0.0001% of Muslims commit terrorist acts.



The Protestant Reformation unleashed huge numbers of violent lunatics, including the ancestors of all modern communists.

Terrorism is not the primary risk factor, their statist/tribal culture is.

[r3volution 3.0]

Terrorism is not the primary risk factor, their statist/tribal culture is.

Therefore, we must embrace our own statist/tribal culture..

[Swordsmyth]

Therefore, we must embrace our own statist/tribal culture..

No, how we run things at home and who we let in are two different things, just like how much I trust my family and how I deal with them are different from how I deal with outsiders or how I might choose who to marry or adopt.

[r3volution 3.0]

No, how we run things at home and who we let in are two different things, just like how much I trust my family and how I deal with them are different from how I deal with outsiders or how I might choose who to marry or adopt.

According to whom?

..Why do you think Donald Trump is the current President?

Is it because voters made a rational appraisal of immigration policy, and favor a statist one, but are otherwise liberals?

[Swordsmyth]

According to whom?

..Why do you think Donald Trump is the current President?

Is it because voters made a rational appraisal of immigration policy, and favor a statist one, but are otherwise liberals?

What the public currently believes is not the point, and they are more classically liberal than the immigrants that are being brought in anyway.

It is possible and proper to have a liberty oriented culture and control immigration to keep from losing it, that is what we need to convert the voting public to believe in.