If Immigration is your Primary Concern, Why Vote for Paul?

Ron Paul on immigration

Here's a Q&A with Ron Paul on immigration.

Emphasis added. Keep in mind that this interview was done before our economic meltdown, so his points on whether the US economy can handle immigration are more relevant.

Q - Please start by summarizing your position on immigration.

Well, I start off with saying that it’s a big problem. I don’t like to get involved with the Federal Government very much, but I do think it is a federal responsibility to protect our borders. This mess has come about for various reasons. One, the laws aren’t enforced. Another, the welfare state. We have a need for workers in this country because our welfare system literally encourages people not to work. Therefore, a lot of jobs go begging. This is an incentive for immigrants to come in and take those jobs.

It is compounded because of federal mandates on the states to provide free medical care—that’s literally bankrupting the hospitals in Texas—and free education.

So my main point is to get rid of incentives that cause people to break the law—entitlements as well as the promise of amnesty, citizenship.

I also want to revisit the whole idea of birthright citizenship.
I don’t think many countries have that. I don’t think it was the intention of the Fourteenth Amendment. I personally think it could be fixed by legislation. But some people argue otherwise, so I’ve covered myself by introducing a constitutional amendment.

Q - How would legislation work?

It would define citizenship. Individuals that just stepped over the border illegally would not be technically “under the jurisdiction of the United States”. [i.e. not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof," in the words of the Fourteenth Amendment] That’s illegal entry, so they don’t deserve this privilege.

Q - What is your view on legal immigration?

I think it depends on our economy.
If we have a healthy economy, I think we could be very generous on work programs. People come in, fulfill their role and go back home.

I’m not worried about legal immigration. I think we would even have more if we had a healthy economy.

But in the meantime, we want to stop the illegals. And that’s why I don’t think our border guards should be sent to Iraq, like we’ve done. I think we need more border guards. But to have the money and the personnel, we have to bring our troops home from Iraq.

Q- Is the economy healthy enough right now?

No. I don’t think so.
I think the economy is going downhill. People are feeling pinched—in the middle, much more pinched than the government is willing to admit. Their standard of living is going down. I saw a clip on TV the other day about somebody who was about to lose their house, they couldn’t pay their mortgage. There’re millions of people involved, people are very uncertain about this housing market. That can’t be separated from concern about illegals.

http://www.vdare.com/pb/070912_paul.htm
 
RevolutionSD,

The only way I can figure out how you arrived at your conclusion is if you don't believe in national sovereignty. And that appears to be the case.

:(

I don't believe in borders and nation states and governments. They are all fictional concepts, not real things.

Having just a little tyranny is like being a little pregnant. We can't allow just a little bit of violence to structure society, because it always leads to more and more until we have what we have today. Those who want to trade liberty for security will get neither.

I used to be a small government guy like you but reading Complete Liberty by Wes Bertrand www.completeliberty.com, and listening to some podcasts and audio books over at www.freedomainradio.com left me with no more arguments on the need for a state.
 
It's not a God-given right for everyone on the planet to immigrate to this country. The problem is NOT that the immigration process takes too long or the numbers are too low, especially since we take in more immigrants than any other nation and immigration is at an all time historic high. No, the problem is that we reward mediocrity with handouts. In earlier waves of immigration, nearly half of all new arrivals returned to their home countries since there was no welfare state to protect them. Obviously that is not the case anymore.

But again, the biggest misconception is that we just don't allow enough immigration to meet demand. If we only increased the numbers everyone would be satisfied. But that's an absurdity on a planet that adds 80 million to its population every year, and the majority of that 80 million is born in the third world. You cannot possibly allow enough immigration to meet demand without becoming another Bangledesh in a short time. But we wouldn't want reality to get in the way of ideology.
 
Because we're sure that Ron Paul means it. Tom Tancredo means it too. Everyone else may or may not be serious about securing the borders. But if Ron Paul says he wants to secure the borders, then he wants to secure the borders. He has no history of doublespeak or insincerity.

I guess if you're a single issue voter then Tancredo might be a better choice, but there's no way that immigration could matter so much to me that I'd quit caring about the Fed, the America empire, the national debt, etc.
 
Because Ron Paul is about eliminating the incentives to come here. That is the true solution to illegal immigration. If they weren't collecting freebies all the time, then they would be welcome as cheap labor.
 
I don't believe in borders and nation states and governments. They are all fictional concepts, not real things.

Then why are you posting on a political forum?

Should we stop our campaigning & donating?

Are you a fiction created in my mind? I don't know, maybe if I shoot you with my fictitious gun, you won't bleed. And if you do bleed, it is just another fiction in my mind, which is a fiction too.

Yes, I understand what you are saying, I think. Strawman, etc. Fictional characters do exist. But they also do have guns that hurt us in their frictional world that they have created.

So for now, I guess I will try my best to beat them at their own game and prevent those that try to use the current rules against my well being.
 
Then why are you posting on a political forum?

Should we stop our campaigning & donating?

Are you a fiction created in my mind? I don't know, maybe if I shoot you with my fictitious gun, you won't bleed. And if you do bleed, it is just another fiction in my mind, which is a fiction too.

Yes, I understand what you are saying, I think. Strawman, etc. Fictional characters do exist. But they also do have guns that hurt us in their frictional world that they have created.

So for now, I guess I will try my best to beat them at their own game and prevent those that try to use the current rules against my well being.

Well, it sounds like you're being facetious, but I will respond anyway.
Im posting here because many people here get it, and many are very close to getting in. The very idea of government is why we are in the place we are in now. Government is force & violence. Everything they do would be impossible without the threat of violence. We will not be able to reform an inherently evil organization.

So, I don't think you're getting my statement about borders, nations, and governments being fictional.

A "nation" doesn't exist in reality. You do exist. I do exist. A tree exists. But someone came up with the idea of "nations" as plots of land run by a small group of elites who monopolize the use of violence.

Borders also do not exist in reality. Mountains exist, rocks exist, but borders are a made-up concept.

We are not slaves, we are individuals. We do not need authoritarian sociopaths running our lives.

And to answer your question, the only point I see in campaigning and donating is getting airtime on the msm. But I question if that alone is worth all the time and money. It's definitely not worth it at the state, congressional, or senate level. We are just encouraging the bastards and sanctioning a system of violence when we participate in the process.

If this still isn't making sense, check out the Philosophy of Liberty video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muHg86Mys7I

Cheers and Happy Sunday!
 
But someone came up with the idea of "nations" as plots of land run by a small group of elites who monopolize the use of violence.

I read this and was struck by how closely this resembles Marx's theories on exploitation of the working classes.

Calling a nation a "fictional" entity is just plain wrong...at the very best it shows poor word choice. Now, a nation could be a "abstract" entity as opposed to a fictional one, which is a world of difference. Fact: America exists in reality today. Fiat money, tax codes, prisons, armies, the second amendment, governing bodies, and countless other examples are expressions of the nation of America. It just isn't a serious argument to call America a fictional entity when it affects all our lives directly every day.

And before deciding we should be dealing only with "reality" instead of abstract entities, we should consider that many abstract things are crucial to your beliefs in anarchy. The concept of private property and individual ownership, for example.
 
Last edited:
I read this and was struck by how closely this resembles Marx's theories on exploitation of the working classes.

Calling a nation a "fictional" entity is just plain wrong...at the very best it shows poor word choice. Now, a nation could be a "abstract" entity as opposed to a fictional one, which is a world of difference. Fact: America exists in reality today. Fiat money, tax codes, prisons, armies, the second amendment, governing bodies, and countless other examples are expressions of the nation of America. It just isn't a serious argument to call America a fictional entity when it affects all our lives directly every day.

And before deciding we should be dealing only with "reality" instead of abstract entities, we should consider that many abstract things are crucial to your beliefs in anarchy. The concept of private property and individual ownership, for example.

No, nations are fictional. You can't point out a nation to me. You can point to land, you can point to a body of water, you can point to people within a geographic region, but there is no such thing as a nation, other than in the abstract.

Now, are we forced to live under all the things you have mentioned? Yes, we can't say it is fiction that we have to pay taxes or that the government steals money from us by printing it.

But the very concept of government making up a nation, is not a tangible thing- it is only through 100's of years of brainwashing and propaganda that we still believe in these things.
 
I like RP's stance on immigration, because his is the freedom approach.
IIRC, he is philosophically for "open borders" and immigration BUT he also realizes that "open borders" is not compatible with our subsidizing illegal immigrants. You have to change one or the other. He pushes for stopping federal mandated subsidies to illegal immigrants (ie: hospitals) and other incentives (birthright citizenship), as opposed to using force to stop illegal immigrants.

Edit: and I believe his stance for protecting the border is more for national security reasons.
IIRC, it was a courageous moment in one of the debates when he warned against scapegoating illegal immigrants.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to specsaregood again."
 
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to specsaregood again."

"I got into trouble with Libertarians because I said there may well be a time when immigration is like an invasion and we have to treat it differently." - Ron Paul
 
"I got into trouble with Libertarians because I said there may well be a time when immigration is like an invasion and we have to treat it differently." - Ron Paul

Ah, I see what Superman is up to...neat trick...I was wondering about getting repped for decade old posts.
 
Back
Top