Immigration policy is one of the most highly contested topics in America, with hyperbole, name-calling, and anger replacing logic in most quarters.
Whether we’re talking about illegal immigration from Mexico and Central America or the influx of migrants coming from the Middle East and Africa, the arguments for and against remain the same – indicating that cultural differences are not a consideration for those who believe in maintaining or expanding current policies.
Libertarians have claimed that a government actively keeping immigrants out would be committing state violence, violating the non-aggression principle held by most in the party. However, when we account for the nearly universally held LP belief that the government should not own land, we find a deep problem in the concept of open borders: it is the rejection of private property.
Even if a private citizen or employer, as would be more common, invited a non-American into the country, the result would still be a violation of private property, given the immigrant’s inevitable movement through privately held and maintained land.
As of 2020, 64 percent of Americans want to maintain or decrease immigration. When Ted Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act passed, under the guise that “It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs,” it was a lie – as shown in the graph below. This act was not consensual, though we now are trained by media to believe the process of deceit is virtuous.
Non-consensual diversification ( diversifying with majority disapproval) has a long history. When Stalin resettled Russians in Estonia, there was no thought of bringing the Baltic people the glories of diversity. Rather, the act was an attempt to destroy existing culture and make the Estonians less likely to cause the empire a problem.
As a thought experiment, picture millions of Americans on the shores of Thailand, demanding to be let in. Certainly, the long and storied traditions and culture of the state would be in severe jeopardy. A media afraid to bring up immigration would report a massive increase in diabetes and obesity, wondering how it could have happened. No moralist alive or dead would call on the Thai people to voluntarily destroy their culture for some such movement.
In the West, we are inundated with the idea that rejection of immigration increases is a form of phobia. As is commonly argued by proponents of open borders, American insecurities and ignorance have made it that accepting “shifting demographics” causes internal tension, as if the occurrence of shifting is an act of nature and out of the control of man. The vile nomenclature is completely analogous to a rapist holding someone down and explaining that “making love” has nothing to do with rape.
For the more rational follower of rhetoric, we hear that America and Europe will NEED these new people ( forget diversity, we need tax sheep) simply to pay the taxes needed for society to maintain. Without even getting into the extreme waste we see in taxes or a Libertarian view on the reduction of government, does this idea even make sense?
Whether we’re talking about the Czech Republic, Yugoslavia, Germany’s Turkish worker program, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Singapore, or the United States, integration of large number leading to a net increase in tax revenue has never occurred. In all attempts during the 20th century, the costs of integration have massively outweighed any tax increase created. To suggest the possibility of achieving a net-positive effect from immigration is a theory with remarkably little evidence for such a commonly practiced policy.
Immigrant Voting Patterns
Could you imagine simultaneously respecting democracy while importing a group from out of the country that will vote overwhelmingly for a specific ideology? It’s tricky, right?
By looking at even third and higher generations, there is no doubt that a continued influx of Mexican and South American immigrants will lead to a more collectivist society than is traditional in the United States. The result would be the antithesis of libertarian values.
The public spoke many years ago. The problem is that no one is listening.
Of course they want open borders, they know if illegals don’t vote for them illegally, they would never win an election honestly. They know that cheating is there best option, and their good at it, they stole this election and plan on stealing all elections, with their dangerous policies. We must stop this or your vote will never count again.
How can it be said that we need these people to pay taxes to maintain society???
They are here ILLEGALLY and do not pay taxes. We, the taxpayers, are paying to support these illegals.
Yes they want anyone they think will vote for them after receiving free stuff, that we had to pay for. Enough CLOSE the border before you end up regretting it thru Terrorist actions. As they now control the nation we are technically a dictatorship. Biden with his reverse all Trump is bringing the country to its knees. Take his damn pen before he actually turns us communist with the CCP in charge.
Of course they do they are more concerned about everyone that can help them further their sick agenda! Diseases, criminal’s, drug lords, come on in! Sick and senile!
It’s about stacking the deck in their own favor. It has nothing to do with protecting the weak and downtrodden immigrants. When in support of single Muslim males by the tens of thousands are they protecting women’s rights like they claim to be in favor of. Let’s understand that women have no rights in a Muslim world and yet we hear screams of racism and xenophobia. Doesn’t make sense? That’s because these immigrants don’t effect their lives on a daily basis. These out of touch millionaire and billionaires don’t shop like us they don’t live in typical suburban neighborhoods. They aren’t affected and they obviously don’t care about those who are. It never ceases to amaze me how easily duped the masses can be. Seemingly they hold the moral high ground without the slightest consideration for the hard working tax paying American citizen. No you see we are the problem we are the haters we are evil. It doesn’t make sense because it has nothing to do with right or wrong. It has to do with protecting their own position allowing them to rape the taxpayers while holding immunity for things we would go to prison for. Just look at the rules for insider trading as it applies to federal elected officials and their families and employees and their families. The rules simply don’t apply to them. This is why we need to do drain the swamp. They rob us blind and demonize us for paying them to do so.