The support of immigration laws is no big deal for non-libertarians. For them, immigration laws are, in principle, no different from any other laws.
Not so for libertarians, however. Libertarians pride themselves for being about freedom. Liberty is the essence of the libertarian philosophy. It’s what sets us apart from liberals, conservatives, and everyone else.
Thus, as part of the freedom philosophy, libertarians oppose socialism and police-state totalitarianism and support the right to do “anything that’s peaceful.”
There’s one big problem, however, for libertarians who support immigration controls: The enforcement of immigration laws entails socialism, police-state totalitarianism, and infringements on economic liberty. That means, obviously, that libertarians who support immigration controls are, at the same time, supporting socialism, police-state totalitarianism, and infringements on the exercise of economic liberty.
Is that a good thing?
Repeal, revoke and extinguish all aspects of the welfare state … e.g. all wealth-transfer programs and the 16th amendment that funds them.
Then I will be able to support “open borders” … as all “producers” will have the opportunity to prosper according to their skill and ability without having to carry the burden of the “looters”.
A primer on how the welfare system is used to steal a “middle class” income:
http://hopelesslysane.blogspot.com/2015/08/its-enough-to-make-you-cry_31.html
I’ve stopped calling myself a libertarian because of drivel like Hornberger’s.
There is more to a nation than economic capacity. If we’ve established anything beyond a reasonable doubt these past fifty years, it’s that uncontrolled access to the U.S. is not good for our country. It results in exclaves, pockets where the laws cannot be enforced, linguistic differentiation, and other deleterious effects.
Nor would it help if we were to dismantle the welfare state. Our inability to tolerate mass immigration stems from the political systems of other countries, which motivate their residents to flee them for better places. Perhaps if all the governments on Earth were to softly and silently vanish away…but let’s not drift off into science fiction.
Fran, I’m confused.
You seem to be arguing for a national homogeneity when you describe the “deleterious effects” of uncontrolled immigration. I thought you advocated for anarchy.
A “propertarian” and “voluntaryist” should have no issues with the existence of enclaves with variation in local common-law and linguistic differentiation so long as there is no state or criminal compulsion involved.
For example, the Germanic Christian communal life of the Amish is both productive and peaceful, while self-isolated from society on its boundary. The Scott-Irish of the Appalachians and the English “high-tiders” of the Carolina coast are similar enclaves.
Where enclaves practice an aggressive theocracy (Islam) or malum-in-se criminal enterprise, their neighboring communities would be free to practice both retaliatory and preemptive self-defense.
Please don’t advocate for national homogeneity in law, language, or culture …