A Case For Libertarian Immigration Control (US) PART 1

[chorizo1337]

nice videos, libertarians are becoming too left wing/pc, yeah open borders is madness, im sorry that many people crossing over will be chaotic. Even in a stateless society there can still be voluntary borders

[otacon451]

my only real issue with libertarianism is that i have no idea how conservation will be promoted. i only see this occurring via pan-nationalism and tribal autonomy. the strongest solution ive found in libertarian thought for conservation/avoiding ecocide is tort, ie bringing lawsuits after the offense. thats insane.

[crystalmethod1000]

why do mexicans believe they own america when the clovis people were here first?

[CytherLynx]

People. you can either disagree, agree. or agree, and do something about it. AT LEAST share this video.

let people know, it is not at all racist to want immigration control.

[Nintendomanwill]

1. Immigrants can vote to take away liberty so gain protection from the State under their interventionist ideology.

2. Welfarism will or at least can destroy health and education quality per capita without any Wicked Brown People.

3. Would you really say this if you didn't have control over property that isn't yours? There is no immigration without Statism.

4. Riots by undesirable haters of peace and freedom are not as damaging as lack of trade freedom.

5. You can only rule your OWN property

[1ndividualAutonomy]

@Nintendomanwill

3 and 5 are answered at the beginning of the video with my premises

2 and 4 themselves are not arguments for more immigration or not having immigration control while the state exists

1 I do not follow.

You may need to watch Part 2 and 3. If you have more questions or objections add me on Skype IndividualAutonomy/Overmind25 and we can cover it more in depth as well as faster there.



[ZamatoElite]

Great video Overmind. Very very good.

But I'll say one thing, I'm certainty no "Libertarian." I have no problem with using State power to exterminate the Muslims, and deport or liquidate all illegal Mexican presence. Both the Muslims and the Mexicans are a disgrace to our Country. This isn't about Nationalism, it's about the safety of our way of life.

[Nintendomanwill]

@ZamatoElite

You're an idiot, even by conservative standards. Extermination of foreign races has embittered people against whites for the last two centuries, and exterminating Muslims in the US will not reflect too well on your Boys over in the Middle East doing their 'protection.' You need to focus on axiomatic principles not inconsistent 'helping Libertarianism by banning people who vote Socialist' bullshit. Protect property don't abrogate it because others have abrogated it. Moron.

[tiecuando]

Where's my M60?

[LokiScoutSniper]

Well anyone who denies some Hispanics or Latinos are not hateful, loyal to their race and country of origin which even if born here is not America, and believes they will control us, is not realizing the problem we face. Reason should tell us ignore it they are like any other racist group. We should take under consideration many Hispanics or Latinos think this is sick.

[LokiScoutSniper]

@LokiScoutSniper Cutting people off at their feet is the best solution, you cannot have a growth of population seen in the past decade without welfare and welfare cuts under a Republican congress and President Clinton helped everyone economically. Defeating Socialist beliefs, we can't have a free market with a government knocking it over constantly. Somethings are just self evident, a matter of principle not passion defeats mundane agendas. No one will come here and do what they do without help

[LokiScoutSniper]

@LokiScoutSniper In other words we can have open borders but without welfare. I promise you people won't have seven kids and work under the table in such a system without suffering their own choices.

[kubaniski]

Now we Libertarians are in a quandary, wtf are we supposed to do?

[NAARandom]

Ah, but we must trust in the Objective Ought to protect us. If we but embrace open borders, the Ought will cum into the hearts of all Hispanics and make them hardcore supporters of neo-Lockean property rights, who will then join us in dismantling the state, and creating Libertopia.

Btw, theists are stupid for believing in God. I would never fall for that sort of mystical nonsense, because I've listened to Thunderf00t.

[NAARandom]

I think the argument that "Mexicans will collapse the state" as a rationale for open borders is one of the most transparently idiotic arguments ever employed. I find it telling, therefore, that several anti-statists who argued for open borders depended heavily upon the idea.  It suggests that, apart from blind adherence to libertarian dogma, they really can't think of a reason why open borders would be helpful (or even neutral) to libertarianism/anti-statism.

[UcanbeGOD]

@NAARandom Yup!

[FlowCell]

The best way to control immigration is to get rid of welfare and kill the Mexican narcostate by ending prohibition. The entirety of the immigration problem and Mexican radicalism, is the result of tertiary consequences nobody expected regarding our policies.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@FlowCell

No, it is not all the US's fault. I have already addressed that you cannot just attack the welfare state. The state is here and Latino,s especially Mexican immigrants are more pro welfare than the current population and support a state. More immigrants=more statism. Ending the war on drugs would probably help violent crime but doesn't fix any of the problems in part 1.

[tattooskin72]

Pretty much everyone in this video was a racist asshole... white, black, brown or purple... they were all racist, nationalist bigots. Bunch of worthless pieces of shit who are counterproductive to the progress of our species.

[MrHerrIQ]

@tattooskin72 What is a race? A sub-specie.... What is a sub-specie? The first division of the comming of new species... What is that? Evolution... What is evolution? Divergence... What is devolution? Convergence... What is anti-racism? Convergence...

[TimothyBragan]

This debate is ultimately not about whites vs. mexicans or blacks, it is about, broadly speaking, libertarians vs. the political class sustaining and expanding their powers. For unrest is their bread, and a stream of misinformation is the water, that feed them.

[TheAntiNICE]

Good video. This is information that needs to be known by many more people.

[thejobloshow]

While I support immigration controls... there is a little irony in fighting against nationalism by taking a position supported by white nationalists. I am yet to be convinced these controls are 'libertarian'. Let's see part 2...

[IndividualAutonomy]

@thejobloshow

Well whether they support the same position are not doesn't mean that it is for the same reasons or similar. Though with libertarian like white nationalists it is closer. Regardless American or white nationalism is better for me compared to other forms of nationalism because I am part of that in group. Where as Mexican or Latino nationalism I am not :(.

[dvide]

I will apologise though if you didn't wish to have a debate about this video in your comment section. You expressed a preference at the beginning to be private messaged with any criticisms, so as this is your channel so I will suggest that you delete the comments if you wish it. I understand and wont mind at all.

[dvide]

@IndividualAutonomy But is that what you're advocating? If the USA invaded Mexico and revised the borders, you'd advocate it because it's the new reality? Again, reality is irrelevant to what you advocate subjectively.

The reality is I might get mugged when I go outside, but I don't support it for moral reasons. Violently stopping anyone from freely travelling across an arbitrary line drawn in the sand is wrong. There is no reasoning for it derived from common sense intersubjective principles.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@dvide

Advocation and recongization are different as well. I am a moral nihilist. I am not worried about homesteading because it has almost no chance of becoming a reality for a number of reasons. I will just leave it at if you want your ideas to become more of a reality, encourage certain people that it will provide them utlitity and find a way to get the most might on your side.

[dvide]

@IndividualAutonomy I am also probably classified as a moral nihilist with regards to objective morality, in that I don't believe it exists either. I just don't find it to be particularly relevant to moral discussion. Truth claims can be made within frameworks of common sense axioms if they are accepted by both parties intersubjectively, and thus human dependant moral conclusions can still be reasoned out and derived. If the reasoning is sound and justifies an action then it's non-arbitrary.

[LiberAnarchy]

So that La Raca guy is a racist and a socialist... *facepalms*

[dvide]

I'm from the UK. I propose strict border control around London to keep out blacks from the city, because of the knife crime statistics there. Oh wait, no, that's retarded and racist. The borders of London are ultimately meaningless and arbitrary and it's also generalising a whole group of people unfairly.

You have a problem with people supporting welfare? Fine, then attack those specific people. Don't attack Latinos as a whole, even if the majority of Latinos do support welfare. It's not fair.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@dvide

God there is no way you watched the video. Private property and state borders are equally "meaningless" they are dependent on humans. One is supported by libertarians because of certain preferences. The second point I SPECIFICALLY addressed it in the video. If you don't pay attention don't comment. What is fair is subjective. London does have black crime rates problems which I will get into in part II. UK needs border control mainly against Islam which I will go into later

[dvide]

@IndividualAutonomy I'd appreciate it if you didn't call me God.

Dependant on humans is irrelevant and it's clouding your thinking. I'm talking about arbitrary borders as we would hopefully agree intersubjectively. The borders of private property is not in the least bit arbitrary if we don't allow for arbitrary claims of property in the first place. Take the homesteading principle. Owning only the land that you make use out of means the land you own cannot just extend arbitrarily for no reason.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@dvide

No it is not irrelevant as I have already addressed. Your homesteading principle has no more truth value or a foundation than someone saying states have borders that must be respected. They are both arbitrary. If you think your idea of property has any more of a foundation than a statist one, then you are being a religious libertarian. Private property has utility for gaining material wealth, as does stopping immigration of economic leftist when you are not in their in group.

[dvide]

@IndividualAutonomy You seem to think that if you address something then I have to agree with you. I'm merely taking issue with the points you raised.

Of course there are no property rights built into the fabric of the universe, but so what? Who else are we talking about BUT human beings? Subjectivity and arbitrariness are not synonyms for the same thing, but you seem to be confusing that. If I prefer sausages to bacon it's not necessarily arbitrary as there may be reasons for it, like taste.

[dvide]

@dvide But of course there is no truth value as to whether sausages or bacon is better. If I prefer one for no reason at all, then it's arbitrary. Similarly, subjective property claims CAN be arbitrary if there is no reasoning for it. Prey tell, why does the border of the USA stop where it is? What is the reasoning for it? What is the reasoning for stopping Mexicans at that arbitrary line in the sand, as opposed to any other?

[IndividualAutonomy]

@dvide

Maybe if you watch the video you would know as well as part II when it is uploaded. The US borders stop where they don't have the might to enforce them. That is the reality Your reasoning is no more true than theirs. You don't own yourself, the product of your labor, what you transform etc unless might is there to back it up.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@dvide

This video assumes you are past the stage of libertarian party propaganda such as "my property has more of a foundation than yours." Most people view the state as legitimate in numerous areas of life, not your pet brand of libertarian property. The state has the might. If anything their position carries more weight than yours since might makes reality. However, they both are arbitrary. One has might, the other doesn't.

[dvide]

@IndividualAutonomy Then maybe your assumptions are flawed. Again, I'm not obliged to agree with your premises just because you brought them up.

I'm not sure what popularity has to do with anything. Popular consensus has also changed many times before in history, so I don't consider it to be insurmountable odds. We no longer consider slavery morally acceptable, and yet there is no truth value in the fabric of the universe about the morality of that action either. It's not relevant to anything.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@dvide

I would bet I have bad premises in certain places. This is not one of them. If you think the homesteading principle has any more truth value or a foundation than state borders you are delusional in that area. Morality is another problem that I have already addressed in the video. I am not a moralist. Popular consensus is secondary to having the might to enforce ideas of property.

[dvide]

@IndividualAutonomy You're repeating yourself and we're going in circles. What does objective truth value have to do with anything? I'm talking about truth within a framework of intersubjective common sense axioms. I'm saying that one is arbitrary and has no reasoning that is used to derive it, from any common sense axioms that we probably do agree upon. Unless you can make a case for it from first principles so we can go through the logic properly? If not then only your claim has no foundation.

[utubehayter]

@IndividualAutonomy

So, private property ownership thru homesteading has no truth value, but your "case" for immigration control does? Lets examine. From the get go - regardless of which side you come out on, there is no chance in hell you can get any type of immigration control that is desirable for libertarians. Second, lets say you do get it, what is the guarantee that it won't keep out libertarians? After all, anyone who survives in the immigration bureaucracy is not likely libertarian.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@utubehayter

I am not appealing to some "higher standard" to base my positions off of. I am describing that if you want as much of a libertarian society as possible and these aggregates concerning the Latinos bother you, immigration control would probably be the best bet. Of course you can get immigration control to largely secure the border more than it is now lol. Any border control as of now is more desirable for libertarian ends which will be gotten more into in Part II.

[utubehayter]

@IndividualAutonomy

You are right.. you are not appealing to some higher standard.. you are appealing to nothing at all. What good is such "libertarianism" when you have already sacrificed every principle? Utilized violence against unoffending people..check. Trampled on private property ..check. Trampled on domestic libertarian "tax payers" ..check.  Is there anything left to your libertarianism than a what can only be identified as fetish for the name?

[IndividualAutonomy]

@utubehayter

And your second question is pretty easy to think through. I don't know why you asked it. Latinos are the largest group both illegal and legal by far and they are a net loss for libertarianism as I already explained in the video. So letting more in with a few libertarians here and there will still lead to more statism. An immigration policy geared towards just letting libertarians in would be nice, but keeping out worse statists is important for libertarianism in the US.

[utubehayter]

@IndividualAutonomy

If you are arguing for what is "nice".. why limit it to just libertarians? While you are engaging in mental masturbation of what would be "nice", why not demand a perfect 36-24-26 figure, extremely high IQ, along with libertarian ideology? lol! Why be so stingy if we are going to build castles in air, in the meanwhile sacrificing/corrupting and converting libertarianism to just-another-nationalist ideology? Just so you don't have to align with "religious" libertarians?

[IndividualAutonomy]

@utubehayter

All of this has been answered in the video in regards to maximizing libertarian ends. I am sorry if you have a problem with it but the questions you are asking are easy to figure out from the format (along with past videos I have done where I have answered some of this). Just from my experience, people that persist with these types of useless questions aren't interested in the position. You can wait for Part II, watch my older videos on this, or talk to me on Skype.

[utubehayter]

@IndividualAutonomy

I am sorry if I misled you into believing that I am interested in your position. To be clear, let me repeat - yours is not a libertarian position. Ends do not justify the means, especially when they are in contradiction. And history is ripe with cases where those that deemed themselves compromised principles in order to be "pragmatic" have done much harm to the idea of libertarianism, especially utilitarians. By your own logic, you should deport yourself from the US.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@utubehayter

Well thank you for clarifying. That saves me a lot of time on skype and any future youtube discussions with you. Since you don't want to pay attention, continue to think taking context into account is dangerous without addressing what I have said, won't come to skype when I offered to talk to you, and aren't even interested in the position to begin with I will just block you lol.

[DaveDoggOwns]

Honestly man? Why stop at immigration control? Why not support the welfare state as well? How about a libertarian death penality?! How about a libertarian War in Afghanistan? How about a libertarian of prostitution? I can go on all day about all the libertarian statism we can cme up with to get more political support. Why the heck stop at immigration control?

[utubehayter]

I think you mean border control - not immigration control. Immigration control already exists for more than 50 years now and have not done anything to provide for more libertarian society. You can argue the same case against nationalist Americans.. almost all of whom want nothing to do with a anti-state position. Do you advocate the deportation of American-born folks who identify themselves marxists, social democrats, republicans, etc. etc.?

[IndividualAutonomy]

@utubehayter

Border Control is here now too lol. Just not as much as I would like. Immigration policy itself will not make most people libertarians. It is just to keep out even less libertarians and is a popular position nationally. This move has political support, unlike "throwing out" the others you mentioned. My position is to have as much of a sustainable libertarian society as possible, not be suicidal. Part II and my previous videos have and will go into this.

[TotalAnomy]

If I lived in the US, I would make the case for open borders, not out of some desire to appeal to latinos or something; but to the masses of young idealistic people who are much more likely to be turned off by border controls than the latinos themselves. It is very hard to defend border controls in universities, whereas the case for free markets is slowly but surely gaining traction.

It seems impossible to me to make a movement out of nothing but crunchy old folk.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@TotalAnomy

Except open borders is suicide financially and politically since it has almost no political support in the US as I have covered in previous videos and will cover in part II.

[DaveDoggOwns]

@IndividualAutonomy Since when did libertarians ever care about having political support? If I cared about having political support than I'd be a statist.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@DaveDoggOwns

I don't know what you care about. I care about context and reality. My goal is preservation of liberty for myself and those I care about then down the line etc. There religious and suicidal libertarians that don't take context or the current situation of possibilities into account.

[DaveDoggOwns]

4:51, how exactly is that any more troubling than the idea that the United States legitamitely owns ANY part of the American continent? Both views on the issue are wrong, but for some reason you think the Hispanic's position is "more" wrong than the US's position.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@DaveDoggOwns

Yes like I explained because the Latinos are more economically leftists etc than the current US population. I am not part of their in group and neither are most Americans. That makes me oppose them.

[DaveDoggOwns]

Also just because you use welfare doesn't mean you support it. Eating the scraps left by your master is not condoning slavery.

[DaveDoggOwns]

So you're going to increase the size of the state in order to prevent an increase in the size of the state?

I honestly don't care if immigrants are more statist. This will make the state collapse quicker anyway.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@DaveDoggOwns

This argument has already been addressed in the past videos by myself and others. It will also be in Part II again for those of you who forgot or didn't see. Increasing the size of the state in one area, mainly along the border to counter expansion in others areas is a trade off and has mass political support among most sectors of the population. Also, I can't tell if you watched the video. Latino Americans are much more economically leftist than most Americans.

[DaveDoggOwns]

@IndividualAutonomy You know what also has mass political support among most sectors of the population? The welfare state.

[IndividualAutonomy]

@DaveDoggOwns

Yes except that doesn't help market economics and myself. It is a lose lose measure. Whereas immigration control is a win win. We win with political support to help implement our ideas through Ron Paul, a libertarian party, or a libertarian Republican with being anti immigration. We also keep out anti libertarian immigrants. Like I said I have been over this and Part II will have it again as well. If you want more come on skype. Add me overmind25/IndividualAutonomy