Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Discuss H&R posts and other Reason articles here.
Post Reply
User avatar
nicole
Posts: 7367
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by nicole » 03 Mar 2017, 08:34

http://reason.com/blog/2017/03/03/is-be ... an-inheren

Doherty spits hot fire directly at the yokels.

Unfortunately doesn't make my preferred point that we'd better also build walls around all uteri.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Privilege is having large phones fit into the garments that society expects you to wear." -Dangerman

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12071
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Highway » 03 Mar 2017, 09:19

That was awesome. I don't know if I've ever seen a website take direct aim at such a loud (and annoying to me) portion of its own commenters.

My personal feeling about 'liberty' as it applies to government is that the cops are the worst part of the government as far as liberty. The more you strengthen cops, the more you give them a pass, the less it matters what the laws are. Unchecked police are far worse than bureaucrats. Maybe this is because I don't want to fight anyone, I don't think I'm a big man who's gonna show those guys what's what if they come try to bang down my door. I'm gonna fold like a cheap suit and get my ass beat by a bunch of mili-pretenders (like I'd ever be so daring as to do anything to get in their sights anyway).

I'm sympathetic to the complaints about bureaucracy. It can feel slow moving, like leviathan come to life and just steamrolling you. And that's because by the time you interact with it, everything is already decided, and you probably didn't have much of a say. But that slowness also means that there's at least some reasoning behind it, whether you like it or not. It's not nearly as likely to be capricious actions by a single person. Yeah, it sucks that your land is now not developable because of a wetland that's protected by the state department of the environment. But it took 40 years to get to that point. And there are reasons to protect those wetlands. Yeah, I can understand that it's a taking of value, and I think that it would be better if there were some way to work that out. But I'm never going to be an absolutist on the idea of "My land, I can do whatever I want with it" because of the externalities there.
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 20795
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by JasonL » 03 Mar 2017, 09:34

What continues to surprise me is the extent people think immigration is a Big Deal. We don't have that much entitlement that gets allocated to this population. We aren't like Cold Europe in that way. We have space. We have low crime. Why is this even a thing?

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12071
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Highway » 03 Mar 2017, 09:38

JasonL wrote:What continues to surprise me is the extent people think immigration is a Big Deal. We don't have that much entitlement that gets allocated to this population. We aren't like Cold Europe in that way. We have space. We have low crime. Why is this even a thing?
Cause it's in their heads as an 'other'. They don't speak english. They don't listen to Lynrd Skynrd. They don't listen when you yell at them. They They They. So they invent reasons like "immigrants use up all the welfare" (which they don't, at all) or "immigrants commit all the crime" (which they don't) that *sound* right, because how can Marcelo be supporting his wife and four kids on those under the table day jobs he picks up at the Home Depot where I can see him as I drive into the parking lot in my F-150 Heavy Duty Superado Edition to get a new hose for my garden?
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 20795
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by JasonL » 03 Mar 2017, 09:41

I guess, but why so many making it the biggest thing in the world right now?

I totally get if you are looking to do Sweden or something here in the US, you can't have it. There is a fundamental tension between large redistribution and large immigration. We ... don't have that.

User avatar
nicole
Posts: 7367
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by nicole » 03 Mar 2017, 09:42

JasonL wrote:What continues to surprise me is the extent people think immigration is a Big Deal. We don't have that much entitlement that gets allocated to this population. We aren't like Cold Europe in that way. We have space. We have low crime. Why is this even a thing?
Especially when you consider how many of the complainers have kids they send to government schools. Most seem to be living the exact same lifestyle as the immigrants they seek to exclude.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Privilege is having large phones fit into the garments that society expects you to wear." -Dangerman

User avatar
Highway
Posts: 12071
Joined: 12 May 2011, 00:22
Location: the Electric Ocean

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Highway » 03 Mar 2017, 10:06

JasonL wrote:I guess, but why so many making it the biggest thing in the world right now?

I totally get if you are looking to do Sweden or something here in the US, you can't have it. There is a fundamental tension between large redistribution and large immigration. We ... don't have that.
I honestly think that a lot of the people with that attitude and mindset think that we do, that the US government totally provides free rides for non-deserving people (i.e. everyone who is not them), and that the 'welfare state' is this huge huge thing. I mean, it is a huge thing, but that's because the US is huge. When 1/3 of the US budget is Social Security, and another 1/3 is Medicare, they can't understand that that's all citizens, there are THAT many people on those programs, and they're not immigrants.
"Sharks do not go around challenging people to games of chance like dojo breakers."

User avatar
Mo
Posts: 20770
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Mo » 03 Mar 2017, 10:14

My favorite are the Schroedinger's immigrants, who are simultaneously lazy, unemployed moochers and taking my job.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 24183
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by thoreau » 03 Mar 2017, 10:22

Mo wrote:My favorite are the Schroedinger's immigrants, who are simultaneously lazy, unemployed moochers and taking my job.
This.

As forge perception that immigrants suck up welfare, I think it is closely tied to the perception that foreign aid is a huge fraction of the federal budget. Not just because people are uninformed in general and even more uninformed about things involving numbers, but also because it involved an assumption that their hard-earned money is going to undeserving Others.

Sent from a phone so their may be speling errors and autocorrect snafu's.
"The first rule of Grylliade club is 'Why are we talking about Grylliade club?'"
--Jake

User avatar
MJGreen
Posts: 77
Joined: 15 Feb 2017, 14:26

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by MJGreen » 03 Mar 2017, 10:52

I'm gonna need more coffee to read through that, but I expect good things. Doherty was fantastic on the recent podcast episode, defending his Mises/libertarian cosmopolitanism essay (which I thought went a little far in places, but his talk with Nick was 100% on point).

For me, the response is pretty simple: it's a weak argument to deny someone entry because some other people who share some geographical or cultural similarities might, some day in the future, vote for terrible D candidates instead of terrible R candidates. It's a legit concern, liberty requires a culture conditioned to appreciate it, etc., but I think libertarianism demands a stronger reason than that to stop someone at the border and say they shall not pass.
Guess I should find a funny sig, huh?

User avatar
Sandy
Posts: 9301
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:03
Location: In the hearts of little children, clogging their arteries.

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Sandy » 03 Mar 2017, 11:55

MJGreen wrote:I'm gonna need more coffee to read through that, but I expect good things. Doherty was fantastic on the recent podcast episode, defending his Mises/libertarian cosmopolitanism essay (which I thought went a little far in places, but his talk with Nick was 100% on point).

For me, the response is pretty simple: it's a weak argument to deny someone entry because some other people who share some geographical or cultural similarities might, some day in the future, vote for terrible D candidates instead of terrible R candidates. It's a legit concern, liberty requires a culture conditioned to appreciate it, etc., but I think libertarianism demands a stronger reason than that to stop someone at the border and say they shall not pass.
I also know more than a few immigrant libertarians. And some Trumpist republicans, in classic shut-the-door-behind-you mode.

That being said, I found his piece kind of lacking fire. It's good, but I think the case can be made like you made it here.
Hindu is the cricket of religions. You can observe it for years, you can have enthusiasts try to explain it to you, and it's still baffling. - Warren


User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 20274
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Jennifer » 03 Mar 2017, 16:58

MJGreen wrote:I'm gonna need more coffee to read through that, but I expect good things. Doherty was fantastic on the recent podcast episode, defending his Mises/libertarian cosmopolitanism essay (which I thought went a little far in places, but his talk with Nick was 100% on point).

For me, the response is pretty simple: it's a weak argument to deny someone entry because some other people who share some geographical or cultural similarities might, some day in the future, vote for terrible D candidates instead of terrible R candidates. It's a legit concern, liberty requires a culture conditioned to appreciate it, etc., but I think libertarianism demands a stronger reason than that to stop someone at the border and say they shall not pass.
The hell of it is that, looking at the current dichotomy between the two parties, those who somehow take for granted "Oh, it's terrible how Those People don't like Republicans" refuse to consider that maybe this is because Republicans have made it obvious they don't like Those People. Even pre-TrumPOTUS -- look at all the politicos who supported anti-immigrant "show your papers"-type laws, and they were overwhelmingly GOP. Or the fact that unmarried Americans tend to lean Democrat rather than Republican -- that's probably because Republicans are far more likely to favor policies which state "Married people are inherently better [for society or whatever] than unmarried." Atheists are more likely to favor Democrats over Republicans -- because Republicans are more likely to say "Belief in God [preferably the Judeo-Christian one] is a prerequisite to be any type of 'good person'."

There was a joke on a Simpsons episode - Homer whined something like "Lenny and Carl are such jerks! [pause] Why don't those jerks want to be my friends?" For the past many years, the GOP's had a similar attitude toward a wide swath of America's population.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 12987
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Aresen » 03 Mar 2017, 17:02

nicole wrote:
JasonL wrote:What continues to surprise me is the extent people think immigration is a Big Deal. We don't have that much entitlement that gets allocated to this population. We aren't like Cold Europe in that way. We have space. We have low crime. Why is this even a thing?
Especially when you consider how many of the complainers have kids they send to government schools. Most seem to be living the exact same lifestyle as the immigrants they seek to exclude.
I think most of their offspring would be better educated by the Detroit Public School system than homeschooling.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 14447
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by lunchstealer » 04 Mar 2017, 18:15

Holy shit. I get deterrence as a thing, but damn. Dumping kids into the foster system just to punish/deter undesirable immigration is just cold on a scale even my worst revenge fantasies won't go to.
"The constitution is more of a BDSM agreement with a safe word." - Sandy

"Neoliberalism. Austerity. Booga booga!!!!" - JasonL

"Repeated headdesk is dangerous yo." - JasonL

User avatar
dead_elvis
Posts: 508
Joined: 01 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by dead_elvis » 06 Mar 2017, 19:48

Jennifer wrote: There was a joke on a Simpsons episode - Homer whined something like "Lenny and Carl are such jerks! [pause] Why don't those jerks want to be my friends?" For the past many years, the GOP's had a similar attitude toward a wide swath of America's population.
That's the stupid thing- immigrants, illegal or otherwise, make natural entrepreneurs who would be sympathetic to a pro free market agenda. Pete Wilson pissed that away. If they had felt welcome in the R camp maybe they could have not only helped Rs get elected but also might have helped push the party in a less crony-capitalist direction.
"Never forget: a war on undocumented immigrants by necessity is a war on all of our freedoms of association and movement."

User avatar
dead_elvis
Posts: 508
Joined: 01 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by dead_elvis » 06 Mar 2017, 19:52

Mo wrote:My favorite are the Schroedinger's immigrants, who are simultaneously lazy, unemployed moochers and taking my job.
I always liked that one, and I came up with a flip-side meme so as not to let liberals' contradictions off the hook- " Schroedinger's immigrants, simultaneously minorities for white-knighting while driving down wages and making unionizing more difficult"
"Never forget: a war on undocumented immigrants by necessity is a war on all of our freedoms of association and movement."

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 12987
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Aresen » 06 Mar 2017, 20:22

dead_elvis wrote:
Jennifer wrote: There was a joke on a Simpsons episode - Homer whined something like "Lenny and Carl are such jerks! [pause] Why don't those jerks want to be my friends?" For the past many years, the GOP's had a similar attitude toward a wide swath of America's population.
That's the stupid thing- immigrants, illegal or otherwise, make natural entrepreneurs who would be sympathetic to a pro free market agenda. Pete Wilson pissed that away. If they had felt welcome in the R camp maybe they could have not only helped Rs get elected but also might have helped push the party in a less crony-capitalist direction.
Not to go Trumpkin on this, but the cultural background does make a difference. In Canada, the Conservatives have been very successful with Chinese and Indian immigrants, who tend to be very entrepreneurial. Latin and Greek immigrants tend to be more left wing and go to the Liberals and NDP.
By buying into the neocon anti-Islam agenda, the Conservatives have largely blown it with immigrants from Islamic countries, who tend to be both entrepreneurial and socially conservative.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Most people don't realize Stephen King downplayed the horror that is Maine. - Jennifer

User avatar
Jennifer
Posts: 20274
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 14:03

Re: Is being for more immigration inherently unlibertarian?

Post by Jennifer » 06 Mar 2017, 20:31

Aresen wrote:
dead_elvis wrote:
Jennifer wrote: There was a joke on a Simpsons episode - Homer whined something like "Lenny and Carl are such jerks! [pause] Why don't those jerks want to be my friends?" For the past many years, the GOP's had a similar attitude toward a wide swath of America's population.
That's the stupid thing- immigrants, illegal or otherwise, make natural entrepreneurs who would be sympathetic to a pro free market agenda. Pete Wilson pissed that away. If they had felt welcome in the R camp maybe they could have not only helped Rs get elected but also might have helped push the party in a less crony-capitalist direction.
Not to go Trumpkin on this, but the cultural background does make a difference. In Canada, the Conservatives have been very successful with Chinese and Indian immigrants, who tend to be very entrepreneurial. Latin and Greek immigrants tend to be more left wing and go to the Liberals and NDP.
By buying into the neocon anti-Islam agenda, the Conservatives have largely blown it with immigrants from Islamic countries, who tend to be both entrepreneurial and socially conservative.
Counterpoint -- Latino immigrants had a lot of "cultural" aspects in common with the GOP (at least the circa-1990s GOP, not the nationalist-nativist shithead GOP of today): so-called "traditional family values," firm commitment to [Catholic] Christianity, and of course the Cuban Castro-haters in Florida were very firmly pro-Republican and anti-anything carrying even the slightest hint of Communist/collectivist economic thinking. I don't think America's Latino population started turning seriously toward the Democrats until the GOP became the party of "papers, please"-type anti-immigration sentiments.
"Myself, despite what they say about libertarians, I think we're actually allowed to pursue options beyond futility or sucking the dicks of the powerful." -- Eric the .5b

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest