Libertarian, heal thyself

Bob Higgs rails against the insidious collectivism of “we”, “us”, and “our” in political discourse. Great stuff.

In other news, the official market libertarian position is (still) that we should open our borders because immigration is a benefit to us.


5 thoughts on “Libertarian, heal thyself

  1. no, the official libertarian position is that A has the liberty to cross the border because A thinks it will be beneficial to A. I have no idea no idea whether it will be a benefit to “us.” Although I’m pretty sure that if A is prevented from doing so by some state security apparatus that state security apparatus will be of great detriment to me in terms of an external cost.

    Make no mistake, the anti open border position is the collectivist one. Throughly collectivist, thoroughly anti-liberal. And the suicide pact is because the state has redistributive authority it must therefore have authority over the border(the freedom of travel) and by extension pretty much any other liberty imaginable.


    1. In the real world of course immigrants aren’t abstract A’s, but men of flesh and blood. Typically they are called Mohammed – and they don’t come alone, but rather with lots of their friends (three quarters of whom are also called Mohammed). Being generally illiterate and unskilled they require to be educated at public expense, “retrained” at public expense, “integrated” at public expense, housed at public expense, cared for at public expense etc etc. Incredibly they also need to be taught – at public expense, naturally, – that raping women is not okay. Because they have lower IQs than the native population they are more prone to crime than natives, claim more in unemployment benefits than natives, are not as able to control their sexual urges as natives, are more likely to riot over things like lack of free WiFi or sweets than natives – all of which, inter alia, lead to more police power and more state activity than there would be otherwise. And when they vote they block vote for the parties of bigger government. And because they come from cultures where cousin marriage is normal, the children they produce (and they produce more than natives) are more likely to be, at best, stupid, at worst drooling nutters who want to chop people’s heads off etc. Moreover, as these fellows are incredibly sensitive when it comes to criticism of their wanting to chop people’s heads off etc, the state must crackdown on free speech and arrest people for tweets and Facebook posts critical of immigration and so on. Now clearly they can’t be allowed to be radicalised, so the state must know all (because it’d be racist otherwise) of our internet histories, and read our emails, and listen to our phone calls etc etc etc so as to protect us. All of this naturally winds some of the natives up. No good. So reeducation is necessary: we must have diversity officers and diversity seminars non stop to convince us of the benefits of multiculturalism, at public expense of course, and this must start early, in school – libertarians, if the subject were not immigration, would call this propaganda or brainwashing, except the subject is immigration… All of which pisses people off even more, which calls into existence “far right” parties to cater to these demands and leads to authoritarian electoral success. – Oh yeah and they rape loads of women; children, too, because of their culture or whatever. Furthermore even if our immigrants are full of good intentions, diversity per se destroys social trust and sense of community, things that are necessary if a society is to get along without government – something that should be of utmost importance to the student of Jasay (who, by the way, is obviously not an open borders lunatic like you, you fucking leftist cuck).

      But yeah no totally yeah turning them away at the border that’s like totally collectivist.



        1. One strand of libertarian doctrine holds that it is precisely private property that should serve as the sole control mechanism of immigration. Immigrants should be entirely free to cross the frontier—indeed, there should be no frontier. Once in the country, they should be free to move around and settle in it as if it were no man’s land, as long as they do not trespass on any part of it that is someone’s land, someone’s house, someone’s property of any sort. They can establish themselves and find a living by contracting to work for wages and to find a roof by paying rent. In all material aspects of life, they could find what they need by agreements with owners and also by turning themselves into owners. Owners, in turn, would not object to seeing immigrants get what they had contracted for.

          A very different stand can, however, be defended on no less pure liberal grounds. For it is quite consistent with the dictates of liberty and the concept of property they imply, that the country is not a no man’s land at all, but the extension of a home. Privacy and the right to exclude strangers from it is only a little less obviously an attribute of it than it is of one’s house. Its infrastructure, its amenities, its public order have been built up by generations of its inhabitants. These things have value that belongs to their builders and the builders’ heirs, and the latter are arguably at liberty to share or not to share them with immigrants who, in their countries of origin, do not have as good infrastructure, amenities and public order. Those who claim that in the name of liberty they must let any and all would-be immigrants take a share are, then, not liberals but socialists professing share-and-share alike egalitarianism on an international scale.

          Anthony de Jasay “Immigration: What is the liberal stand?”

          BTW, that sound that you can hear is you getting BTFO.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s