Thursday, October 17, 2013

Open Borders — A Good Way To Die On Principle



And speaking of libertarians being tainted with liberalism, again I point out that open borders is a suicidal position for libertarians, because about the only libertarians on earth are in the United States and Europe and European-settled nations, which are of course the places that have borders that everybody wants open. So opening those borders will swamp us (and Europe, etc.) with even more people hostile to libertarianism and stamp it out for good and all. Over at the Libertarian Alliance there's a post from Rad Geek, "Against All Nations and Borders." advocating open borders with the usual "principle" arguments, but the best part of that post is in the comments, where Paul Marks writes:

I see — so people have the right to travel and settle anywhere “as long as no one else’s rights are violated”.

Well that is fair enough – as the people concerned often come with the express intention of “violating the rights of others”.

As far back as 1982 illegal (yes illegal) immigrants sued the State of Texas for “free” (i.e. tax payer funded) education – and the Supreme Court upheld their claim (the Law Schools being what they are – i.e. collectivist play pens).

In California illegal immigrant groups repeatedly had the courts over turn votes to limit the government services they could have – after all the basic reason they had come was to VIOLATE THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS.

There was no point in being in the United States if they were not allowed to loot other people – that is why they had come in the first place.

“No you do not understand – we do not believe in nations at all”

But the illegals DO believe in nations – that is why they wave the Mexican flag and celebrate Mexican independence day, and teach their children that “this land is really OURS” (that the wars of 1836 and 1848 should have gone the other way)

They are not anarcho-capitalists – the illegals are (in their own way) patriots. The trouble is that they are Mexican patriots.

Nothing to do with “race” (after all Ted Cruz is Hispanic and Hispanics died defending, as well as attacking, the Alamo) – but everything to do with the beliefs in their hearts. And they do have beliefs.

If you doubt me why do you not ASK the illegals?

Ask them if the right side won in the war of Texan Independence or in the Mexican-American war – ASK THEM.

“It does not matter” – sorry but it does matter.

However, there are one vast group of immigrants who really do NOT care about “nations” and “borders”,

These are the forces of Islam.

The forces of Islam really do not care about “nations” and “borders”.

But if anarcho capitalists think this means they do not come to “violate the rights of others” you are mistaken.

On the contrary – it is the most basic duty of a Muslim to spread the power of ISLAMIC LAW (that is what “submission to Allah” means – the unbelievers must “feel themselves subdued”).

That is as true in Sweden (try being a Jew in Malmo – indeed trying being a women in Malmo) as it is in Arabia.

And it is true in the United States also – go to the Twin Cities of Minnesota and find out.

It is not just “you can not have a dog in my taxi – the Prophet said so” – it is training their children to be suicide bombers and so on.

“But that is just for Somalia” – neither the Koran or the Hadiths say anything about “Islamic law is just for Somalia” (a place that Mohammed never even visited) Islamic Law (to a sincere Muslim) is for the world.

“Islamophia” – no I give people the basic respect of taking their beliefs seriously.

If a illegal immigrant from Mexico says their loyalty is to Mexico – I believe him (or her).

[If they side with the people who defended the Alamo, not those who attacked it, then it is a different matter].

If a Muslim tells me that they are s a sincere follower of Mohammed (of the Koran and the hadiths) I believe him (or her).

[If they formally reject Islam, and thus risk death from the forces of Islam, then it is another matter}/

So if it is really a matter of “they have a right to come – as long as they do not intend to violate the rights of other people”, then there is no disagreement.

For they DO come with the intent to violate the rights of people.

And there are other good comments there.  Do go read it all HERE.

No comments:

Post a Comment