 Recently, I've been spending a lot more time listening and reading to Hans-Hermann Hopper than I have before, and listening to his reasoning on why libertarianism is inherently a right-wing ideology, founded on the same ideas as a lot of right-wing views. And I've come to realise the man has got some very, very, very good points. We have far more in common with anyone on the right than we do with anyone on the left. And it got me wondering, why does the dissident right hate us so much? I don't mean conservatives take my typical example being Gropis and Nick Fuentes and nationalists. Why do they hate us? And I have to look back two times when I'd posted on the sensitive issues on my Instagram and these people have come in, and when they leave their comments they say either one of two things. The first one is, you're all pedophiles, which is just fucking ridiculous, there's no point even engaging with that sort of argument. The second one is that apparently we are for immediate open borders, and we are totally okay with our culture and race being displaced and replaced, and we're totally fine with people coming in who want welfare to come in and vote for more welfare, therefore we must be for welfare. And I heard all this and I thought, where are you getting this information from? This isn't what we believe. However, recently I've been paying a lot more attention to the American Libertarian Party as they've been leading up to their nomination for a presidential candidate, and Joe Jorgensen won it. As soon as she did she started handing out some very heavy red pills on Twitter saying that she was going to abolish the ATF, which immediately wins over gun rights voters for you, and saying that she's going to end the drug war and release all nonviolent offenders, so that easily gets you votes for the civil liberty crowd. Then I saw people who aren't Libertarians, but we're very excited to hear that she was going to disband the ATF and immediately do a 180 when someone told them about her immigration policy, and if you look at it she wants to open the borders on day one, and you can see how this might appeal to the Libertarian idea that the state doesn't have the right to control the borders, but it's so out of whack. The Libertarian position on immigration is that you can't have open borders and a welfare state. If you are president for four years they're still going to be a quite a substantial welfare state after those four years because the welfare state is titanic, so if you open those borders in day one you've completely flipped the priorities on their head. I realised this was extremely prevalent with all of the party candidates, even Jacob Hornberger who was, for people like me, who would consider themselves supporters of the Mises Corkus or the Libertarian party. You should be surprised to hear that he has the exact same view. I saw a debate with Adam Kokesh and Nick Fuentes and the first question that is asked to Adam is would you abolish ICE, and he says yes, day one. I thought, oh this is it, there we go, I've found it, I've found out why they hate us. Because our visible spokespeople have got their priorities completely back to front. You can't have open borders with a welfare state. I was under the impression that this was a unanimous agreement among Libertarians. My first video on this channel was called Why Libertarians Are Pro-Immigration and I've taken it down. Because the arguments I made were yeah you can't have open borders and a welfare state, we get rid of the welfare state and then you can talk about opening borders. Or privatising borders is the best way to put it, not opening, privatising. And I had to take it down in light of this realisation because holy shit we need to get something squared away first. You are putting the cart before the horse when you want to open borders before you completely get rid of the welfare state. Why is this? When you have a massive welfare state, it stands to reason that most of the people trying to immigrate there are immigrating to the welfare state. It attracts bad faith actors, it's almost true for people to say that a country won't be sending their best because you aren't attracting the best, you don't attract the best with a welfare state, you do attract the worst, you don't attract people who want to build a life for themselves, contribute to the community and give back to the community. Add to the wealth of the domestic population, no, no, when you have a welfare state, you incentivise people coming there to take from it, not to give, what would these people do? If you open the borders on day one while a welfare state still exists, you literally get a flood of people and when they're in, the democratic party comes along and says hey hey hey, if you've come here, vote for us and we'll give you more welfare. So these people have come for welfare, at your good grace and then the other party says vote for us will give you more, there we go, you've just given the next presidential election to the democrats, they're going to do away with all of your ends of corporate welfare, any measures you put in place to prevent gun rights abuses, any limitations or even dismantling of the fed, they'll undo it all. You will literally give the democrats millions of votes and they will undo any good work you could possibly do in four years as a libertarian party president. Now let's remember, while a state exists, if a state exists and you are a libertarian, you must push that state in a direction where it protects property rights, you must get it to the point where that is all it does. If you let in a bunch of people who want more welfare, well they're not going to care about your property rights, welfare itself is an extraction of property rights, if you can move somewhere, be given all sorts of free means like free travel, free housing, free health care, that's at the expense of your property. You will just be allowing a new government to come after you with all the tools and bodies necessary to enact even more welfare, even more abuse of property rights. And let's remember, if the state does have two secure property rights, we take the hypothetical that the entire world was privately boarded. Private borders would not be open in the way that a public border would be considered open. An open border that the libertarian party would give you would be literally just that. I was under the impression that as libertarians when we said open borders, that we meant privatised borders, that's not what these people mean, that is not what the libertarian party takes to mean open borders, they mean literally open, you can go anywhere and do anything you want, it is not at the behest of the property owner. That is not a libertarian stance I'm afraid, libertarianism must put private property over all things, while the state exists it must mantle property rights, we can talk about what to do after the state is gone for all we like, but while the state is here we need to literally make the best of a very very very bad situation, and all you will do in this is create a worse situation. It will create further destruction of property rights, it will expand the welfare state, it will remove gun rights, it will remove a lot of the things that the libertarian party is championing the good things, they will cause their own self-destruction. These things must be secured first before anything else, you cannot have open borders and a welfare state, you can't have a welfare state full stop, so get rid of it, then think about the borders, the priorities are completely wrong and you are sowing your own destruction if on day one you want to open the borders and then cross your fingers and hope you can get rid of the welfare state in four years and that you haven't just handed the keys to the enemy to bring it back as soon as they get the chance. Borders would be the last thing to privatise if we were to take an incremental approach into anarcho capitalism, and I'm not saying you have to be an anarcho capitalist, I would say that any libertarian should recognise that the issue of borders is at the bottom of the list of any sort of priority list that you can have no matter what kind of libertarian you are, we have so many many bigger issues that have to be completely gotten rid of before the question can be entertained, you are putting the cart before the horse, how can you do that and not expect a massive catastrophic collision. So I say to the dissident right, I'm sorry that this is the message that you've been greeted with, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny, it doesn't make much sense and I really really think the libertarian party is destroying their chances of doing well because of it, because people realise it's a very bad idea, not only are they destroying their chances but if they got in they would unbelievably destroy their chances next time around, they would literally be giving the party of welfare just all the votes it possibly needs to take total control and dismantle any good that could possibly be done. If you open the borders on day one, expect in four years time borderline socialism because that is what the Democrats will do if they have the majority that they need, don't bloody give it to them, take it easy.