Libertarian Presidential Candidates Champion 'Open Borders'

[r3volution 3.0]

I don't understand "libertarians" who support open borders. Closed borders protects private property owners on the border from trespassing by foreigners.

Jose walking from his property in Mexico to Joe's property in the US, with Joe's permission but without the USG's permission, isn't trespassing. The idea that governmental approval is required to enter the US implies that the government owns all the land in the US, i.e. communism of land. Border controls violate private property rights by prohibiting landowners from opening their land to whomever they want. The same applies to the effects of border controls in the interior of the country: e.g. companies being prohibited from entering into employment contracts with whomever they please. This isn't to say that border controls are never justified. Like other property rights violations (e.g. taxes) they can be justified to prevent even larger property rights violations, as circumstances require.

 

[106459]

Immigration =/= citizenship

That's a fair point, immigration does not equal citizenship (green cards/legal resident, etc). Except for when it does; in the future. Reagan, supposed to be one of the great conservative beacons, was one who just gave amnesty and then made all those immigrants == citizens. Am I expected to believe that these illegal immigrants aren't going to become citizens? No one's going to kick them out. It's not gonna happen. Didn't happen in Reagan's time; certainly won't happen today. Let me know if there was more to be understood.

More importantly, the study I explicitly linked to, was specifically about voting immigrants ("Virginia’s foreign-born voting population has ballooned to about 550,000"). Running the math that we have available on that, we should be able to reliably account for 50% of the D's winning votes in VA 2017 was due to voting immigrants. Is that good?

 

[PAF]

[MENTION=42010]106459[/MENTION]

Trump, republican, won the presidency, a democrat did not. He was voted in by republicans. He passed the largest Omnibus in the entire history of this nation, something obama could only have wet dreams about. He never utters a word about FedDeptEd/Common Core, or private property and contract rights to the American people.

What’s up with that? Do you think keeping immigrants out will change his mind? Democrats did not win the presidency this ‘round.

 

[tfurrh]

Regarding Latinos....(have no idea about other nationalities). 2/3rds vote D and 1/3rd R. The major issue for the 2/3rds is immigration. The 1/3rd that vote R still have the same immigration views but pro-life is their no 1 issue. I say there's got to be a middle road where immigration for work and such is easier, but citizenship is difficult (ex end birthright citizenship).

This would even up the Latino vote imo.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Nice in theory, but not so much in practice...

"One of the proudest positions that we have in this party is our open-border plank," Future of Freedom Foundation founder Jacob Hornberger, who won the party's non-binding presidential caucuses in Iowa and Minnesota this month, said during a California debate that I moderated Feb. 16. "I grew up on a farm on the Rio Grande. We hired illegal immigrants….Y'all know about the checkpoints. We got 'em over there. I've been stopped by the Border Patrol myself when I was in high school, 'Open up your trunk!' Warrantless searches onto our farm to bust our workers. It's a police state, and there's only one solution to it: Dismantle it all. People have a fundamental, God-given right to cross borders like human beings and not die of thirst and dehydration in the desert and on the back of 18-wheelers."

Well, that happened when I was in High School too. They were looking for alcohol. Will that stop if the borders are opened? Will the “DUI” checkpoints go away, where they arrest 2 people for DUI, and 20 people for outstanding warrants? Will welfare end if the borders open? Will regulations and crony corporatism end? What will this buy us?

Proudest position? To virtue signal? Sorry, got news for you. All of those insane SJWs that you are trying to appeal to find libertarians and Libertarians to be their biggest enemies, because libertarians don’t support their socialism and communism. And all of the cheap labor crony corporatists laugh at libertarians, but they may pay you to write articles supporting cheap labor immigration for them.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Regarding Latinos....(have no idea about other nationalities). 2/3rds vote D and 1/3rd R. The major issue for the 2/3rds is immigration. The 1/3rd that vote R still have the same immigration views but pro-life is their no 1 issue. I say there's got to be a middle road where immigration for work and such is easier, but citizenship is difficult (ex end birthright citizenship).

This would even up the Latino vote imo.

I know plenty of Latinos that do not support more immigration of any kind. But yes, they are probably outnumbered by the La Raza segment, that wants immigration from south of the border, but not from Asia.

 

[tfurrh]

I know plenty of Latinos that do not support more immigration of any kind. But yes, they are probably outnumbered by the La Raza segment, that wants immigration from south of the border, but not from Asia.

I was being very broad/general but yes on many exceptions

 

[106459]

[MENTION=42010]106459[/MENTION]

Trump, republican, won the presidency, a democrat did not. He was voted in by republicans. He passed the largest Omnibus in the entire history of this nation, something obama could only have wet dreams about. He never utters a word about FedDeptEd/Common Core, or private property and contract rights to the American people.

What’s up with that? Do you think keeping immigrants out will change his mind? Democrats did not win the presidency this ‘round.

Yep, Trump is a Republican who got voted in, 2016. Give our current immigration policy 20 years, looks like 459,000 a year, another 9 million people.

2.6 million votes R
6.5 million votes D​

How does that help? Democrats aren't even going to have to pay lip service to moderates at that point. We'll be full-blown reparations required mode.

If you'd like to make a point about the "largest Omnibus", I'll listen. As it stands, the US currency is inflated away year after year, the economy is listed as growing, no one is interested in shrinking the overall size of government, so it would only be a logical deduction that the 2019 Omnibus is larger than the 2018 Omnibus.

Yeah - there are a ton of things Trump has been quiet or silent on. I'm pleased that my taxes were cut, regulations rolled back, MSM is being called out as fake news. Then there have been all of the debates of "he is more of the same" - right. There was no option to make any of that better. It is a non-argument when you are presenting a non-choice. I'm glad we have Trump's judges (the option), over Hilary's judges (the other option).

So, in regards to Education? I'm not happy he hasn't trashed Common Core. I am happy that he appointed Betsy Davos, a "Charter School advocate". Of the two options: either keep growing DoE, or put someone in office who will work to remove the dirty-word stigma of "Charter School", I'll take the 2nd option I can get.

-What's sad is I tried to go up and read some articles .. and I like how the spin is at it again. I'm being told Davos is "anti-charter school" ... when it looks like the reality is this:

"The Trump administration proposed a major reduction in federal education spending Monday that would eliminate nearly 30 standalone programs, including ones that support homeless students, rural students, English learners, and magnet schools.

Perhaps most surprisingly, the proposal would effectively axe a long-standing federal program that has catalyzed charter school growth across the country.

The department packaged this move as part of a bigger effort to give states more decision-making power."

...So, who knows. I never said Trump was a great President. He's the greatest in my lifetime. Looks like he wants to shrink federal government spending on education. Probably increase Charter Schools as an option. Cutting my taxes was great. The alternative is not great. Very bad, actually.​

So, "Do you think keeping immigrants out will change his mind", is just a complete straw-man and misrepresentation of anything I said. I said to keep immigrants out, to stop the bleeding, because the current policy (the only policy that will be allowed), is to make the Democrat's job twice as easy. To get bigger government.

Until your plan has a 100%, stop the welfare, import immigrants that we know will reliably be 50:50 instead of 62:25, I'm not receptive at all to the concept of open borders and more immigration.

 

[revgen]

Jose walking from his property in Mexico to Joe's property in the US, with Joe's permission but without the USG's permission, isn't trespassing. The idea that governmental approval is required to enter the US implies that the government owns all the land in the US, i.e. communism of land. Border controls violate private property rights by prohibiting landowners from opening their land to whomever they want. The same applies to the effects of border controls in the interior of the country: e.g. companies being prohibited from entering into employment contracts with whomever they please. This isn't to say that border controls are never justified. Like other property rights violations (e.g. taxes) they can be justified to prevent even larger property rights violations, as circumstances require.

That's how national sovereignty works. Calling it "communism" is a mischaracterization. The government doesn't own the land. They just control the borders with other countries.

If you want to end national sovereignty and have the only borders be property borders, then you might as well end national sovereignty altogether.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

That's how national sovereignty works. Calling it "communism" is a mischaracterization. The government doesn't own the land. They just control the borders with other countries.

If you want to end national sovereignty and have the only borders be property borders, then you might as well end national sovereignty altogether.

Yes indeed, that is how national sovereignty works, which demonstrates the contradiction between national sovereignty and individual liberty.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Immigration =/= citizenship

Sooner or later it does.

Even if it takes a revolution.

 

[Swordsmyth]

That's how national sovereignty works. Calling it "communism" is a mischaracterization. The government doesn't own the land. They just control the borders with other countries.

If you want to end national sovereignty and have the only borders be property borders, then you might as well end national sovereignty altogether.

That's exactly what the globalibertarians want.

They either deny or really want the consequence that the whole world is dragged down to the lowest common denominator of tyranny.

 

[Anti Federalist]

That's exactly what the globalibertarians want.

They either deny or really want the consequence that the whole world is dragged down to the lowest common denominator of tyranny.

"No borders! No walls! No USA at all!"

That's the globatarian goal.

That and reducing the once majority European white population to dispossessed second or third class citizenship, simply because what a good portion of that demographic support are ideas that are a thorn in the side and impediment to globotarian's plans.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

"No borders! No walls! No USA at all!"

That's the globatarian goal.

That and reducing the once majority European white population to dispossessed second or third class citizenship, simply because what a good portion of that demographic support are ideas that are a thorn in the side and impediment to globotarian's plans.

Don't project; race is of no interest to libertarians one way or the other.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Don't project; race is of no interest to libertarians one way or the other.

I'm well aware of that.

By refusing to recognize that fact, the open borders mob opens us all to invasion, displacement and genocide.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I'm well aware of that.

By refusing to recognize that fact, the open borders mob opens us all to invasion, displacement and genocide.

1. Demographic changes won't significantly affect political outcomes one way or the other; the problem is a matter of human nature.

2. Peaceful immigration isn't invasion.

3. Having hamburger joints displaced by taco stands isn't a problem warranting a political solution.

4. One population being outbred by another isn't genocide.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Don't project; race is of no interest to libertarians one way or the other.

LOL

There are powerful globalibertarians who seek to artificially change our cultural and racial makeup, we are in the way of their stupid world government schemes.
They don't care about liberty except for themselves.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

LOL

There are powerful globalibertarians who seek to artificially change our cultural and racial makeup, we are in the way of their stupid world government schemes.
They don't care about liberty except for themselves.

Who are these powerful libertarians controlling the world from behind the scenes?

Seeing as how the world is moving rapidly toward socialism, they seem to be doing a rather shit job, no?

 

[Swordsmyth]

1. Demographic changes won't significantly affect political outcomes one way or the other; the problem is a matter of human nature.

2. Peaceful immigration isn't invasion.

3. Having hamburger joints displaced by taco stands isn't a problem warranting a political solution.

4. One population being outbred by another isn't genocide.

When one culture comes in vast numbers and uses it's political clout to impose big government on another culture it is an invasion by novel means and that is what is happening.

The breeding difference is artificially induced and the active genocide will follow when the foreigners gain sufficient power.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Who are these powerful libertarians controlling the world from behind the scenes?

Seeing as how the world is moving rapidly toward socialism, they seem to be doing a rather $#@! job, no?

The Kochs are one example.
And they don't care about the move towards socialism as long as they can do as they please as part of the ruling class.