Tag: statist

The Libertarian Argument for Closed Borders

Jack Parkos | United States

Many modern libertarians are proponents of open borders with little to no restriction on immigration. But is this stance appropriate for libertarians? Just because other right wingers support closed borders, does not mean they are anti-immigration. Rather, they seek restrictions on it. It isn’t “anti-libertarian” to support secure borders. Even Ron Paul was not an open border libertarian.

We live under a massive welfare system, which balloons because the US government has caused massive destabilization all over the world. This causes mass immigration, and sometimes even state importation of refugees and immigrants. Refugees will leech off the welfare state at the expense of taxpayers. This does not seem like the stance a presumed libertarian would take. It could easily be said that open borders are just as statist as closed borders.  Many libertarians believe that the only borders should be one’s own property. But we must understand that the federal government has power over the border, and it likely will not give up this power anytime soon. Thus, libertarians must choose the position that will best protect our liberty, and it isn’t to open the borders.

Open border libertarians argue that the welfare state argument isn’t an argument against immigration but an argument to end the welfare state. In truth, it is an argument for both. But how does placing more people on welfare and thus expanding the welfare state, help reduce it? Libertarians should be trying to reduce the number of people on welfare. By allowing more people in who may not have skills desired by the markets, we only expand the welfare state and harm the immigrants who want to enter legally and join the workforce.

A study done by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that 62% of illegal immigrants receive welfare of some kind. Los Angeles County spent 1.2 billion dollars on welfare benefits for illegal immigrants in just two years. These are people who are getting free government handouts at the expense of the taxpayers. Even if the welfare state is reduced, it could easily be voted back up.

A solution to this could be to have a vetting process based on value to the job market. Immigrants who want to work should be welcomed into the country. Perhaps this system could be similar to an Elis Island system.

Immigrants tend to vote in support of big government to get benefits. Democratic politicians use immigrants to gain votes. Of course, many people already vote for larger government, but we do not need more people voting for this. Obviously, it is impossible to regulate people coming in based on political ideology. But reducing it to peaceful workers will decrease the likelihood of people voting for welfare, and thus weaken the Democratic party.

US foreign policy has been a disaster. The policy of destabilizing regions based on the drug war and war on terrorism must stop.  But in the meantime, there is a lot of danger going on in the world and we shouldn’t put the American people in harm’s way, thus we should ideally be isolated from the conflict.

In Latin America, the drug war has created violent cartels and gangs like MS-13. The war on drugs should be ended, but that does not mean we should let gang members in. A proper vetting system could prevent criminals from getting in and allow peaceful people to enter.

Then we get to the Middle East, which becomes more complicated. It is no lie that US foreign policy has created the terrorist problem we see today. But is it smart to import people from countries that hate the United States and the West in general? The answer is obviously no.

There is a refugee crisis in the world. But this does not mean we should not import them all into the country. There are too many security concerns with this. To better understand why this is dangerous we must look at Europe.

Europe has taken a very open borders stance and has paid heavily for this. In the past years, there have been several terrorist attacks in Europe. Even on top of that, crime rates have skyrocketed since these policies began. as an example, an estimated 77% of rapes in Sweden are committed by the Muslim Male population. Muslim males make up 2% of Sweden’s population. This does not mean all Muslims are rapists and evil, but this stat shows the danger of letting everyone into the country without a proper vetting process. Many of these refugees are unemployed and are subsidized by the government.

Open borders lead to more authoritarianism, so an ideology based on preventing such authoritarianism should respond appropriately.

How could the border and immigration issues be addressed?

  • End the welfare state. This will take a while likely, so reduce it as much as possible.
  • Stop welfare incentives for people to enter solely to live off welfare.
  • Create a proper vetting system for South and Latin America (As well as other nations in Europe, Asia, etc). to vet out those who will work, and those who would only live off of welfare. Those with clean records should be allowed to enter legally and become citizens.
  • Try to stop illegal immigration into the country.
  • Allow peaceful illegal immigrants an easier path to citizenship.
  • Deport illegal immigrants found guilty of a violent crime.
  • End the war on drugs that has destabilized Latin America.
  • Stop the war on terror overseas and focus on domestic issues.
  • Temporarily stop all immigration from the Middle East until hostilities cool down a bit and we can have a proper vetting system.

Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Featured Image Source


Throw Out Milton Friedman

By Mason Mohon | @mohonofficial

I think it’s pretty clear that Friedman is a statist. -Murray Rothbard

Milton Friedman is popular, and not just “libertarian popular” (although he is) but mainstream popular. His book Capitalism and Freedom has over half a million sales and Free to Choose has also had its fair share of economic and political influence. I have spoken to many fellow lovers of the free market and many have stated he was their primary influence in pushing people towards libertarian ideology.

Continue reading “Throw Out Milton Friedman”

Stop Making A Big Deal About The Royal Wedding

By Nick Hamilton | United Kingdom

In case you weren’t one of the over 29 million Americans to care enough about the Royal Wedding to tune in, Prince Harry of Wales and Meghan Markle, an American, were officially married in England this weekend, just outside of London. The Royal Wedding is cool and all, but as Americans, why do we care about two public figures getting married?

Keep in mind, Prince Harry isn’t a political figure. He has virtually no political power as of now. He’s not a Prime Minister. Also keep in mind that England spent about $43M on this wedding, which is going to come back to bite the taxpayers across the pond when they can barely afford to keep their healthcare system up and running. You may recall that a few weeks ago, the UK Government mistreated Alfie Evans, a toddler, by barring him from leaving the UK to seek medical assistance in Rome. The hospital made a decision to take Evans off life support, without the consent of his parents. A UK court then agreed with the hospital. And now, this same government is putting on this Royal Wedding, spending a bit less than $43M.

What’s also quite concerning is that the guards were, you guessed it, armed. Yes, a nation that has taken as many weapons as they can from their people is now arming guards who protect the Royal Wedding. But I thought guns weren’t good for defense, England? I have no problem with the Royals being protected the best they can be, but it’s just another example of the hypocrisy of the UK Government. It just further proves that the United Kingdom doesn’t exactly care about their people, but they’ll do anything for the Royal Family.

Also, if you were to criticize Islam at this wedding, you better think again. Remember, criticism of Islam is illegal in the United Kingdom because the United Kingdom doesn’t believe in free speech. Don’t forget that just a couple of months ago, Canadian right-wing journalist Lauren Southern was denied entry into the United Kingdom because of her criticisms of Islam. I happened to enter the UK that same day, and I guess call me lucky that I didn’t get denied access because I’ve criticized Islam many times. Britain has arrested its own citizens on numerous occasions for criticism of Islam but doesn’t seem to care when people criticize Christianity. We should be celebrating acts of freedom and liberty in America, not a country that doesn’t seem to represent American values.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. I honestly hope they do well for this planet, and I hope they’re happy. But honestly, why should so many Americans care. The UK has a past of not advocating for freedom, so why are we jumping all over this?

Featured Image Source.

Bring Down The State By Refusing To Play Its Game

By Austin Anderholt | United States

The state is an entity of evil and force, for its very existence depends on stealing from, locking up, and brainwashing its victims. I have involved myself much politically, working to denounce this evil. I have started social media pages that have garnered massive followings. I have written articles that have been collectively seen by thousands of eyes. I have repeatedly denounced the murder, theft, extortion, kidnapping, fraud of both the United States federal government and all other states.

My activism, while possibly insightful, has done nothing at all to help the dissolution of the stage in the long term. It’s possible that I’ve convinced hundreds of people that “taxation is theft” and that “the state is evil” but to what extent? Everyone will still submit to paying taxes and obeying the involuntary state out of fear.

I ask you this: How many more children will be bombed by the american government before you say It’s time to end this. How many more trillions of dollars must the american government steal before you say I refuse to put up with this! How many more millions of people must be locked in a cage for victimless crimes before you take action against the coercive state?

It’s time to act. It’s time to make an actual change. The American civil rights movement didn’t abolish Jim Crow by convincing racists not to be racist. They disobeyed the laws of the state that they saw were wrong. They were actively insubordinate to demands that they deemed unjustified.

Notice, the American civil rights movement did not fight back against their tyranny by committing a specific act. They fought back by refusing to follow something. Did Rosa Parks protest bus segregation by destroying a bus? Fighting a bus driver? No. She simply stayed out, refusing to obey laws she felt were wrong.

Clearly, the most efficient revolutions are revolutions that, rather than actively aggress upon their enemy, simply refuse to obey the tyranny that they feel is being placed upon them. This can be illustrated through many examples in history, such the carnation revolution, velvet revolution, cedar revolution, and tulip revolution.

These ideas show us that government can be swiped away through a matter of simply everyone voicing themselves against the state at once. A simple, short, dissolution of coercion. Mises, after all, did make clear that governments depend on popular support. Without it, they have no foundation to stand on.

That is why I’m calling for an uprising right now. Many of you might notice it’s tax season right now. Imagine if we collectively sprang up against government one day against the extortion of taxation. It’s time that we no longer sit here and theorize; any insubordinate action against the state will get us that much closer to a free society.

Any small act will go a long way. Refuse to further submit. Albert Camus once said “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.” This is exactly what we must do. I have been inspired by the many civil disobedience protests against the state that figures like Adam Kokesh have done. It is now time for us all to do the same. Don’t pay taxes, smoke a plant, do whatever you want to yourself without hurting anyone else because you own yourself and the state doesn’t. 

Resist its power over you and live as a free human.

Featured image source.

The Shutdown: Just Another Show That Pragmatism Will Never Work

By Ryan Love | USA

In 2013 on the eve of implementation of Obamacare Republican Ted Cruz initiated a filibuster to shut down the government. The theory being that by using the shutdown as leverage Obamacare would not be implemented. Naturally, the Democrats met this action with fierce resistance. They lambasted the unwillingness of Republicans to compromise and they raised can about how damaging a government shut down can be. No one thought to ask them “Would Democrats support a shutdown?” But if they had I wager the answer, if you could get a straight one from a politician, would be no.

Fast forward to a week ago, Republicans, lacking enough senators to surpass the 60 Senator limit to pass the continuing resolution to prevent a shutdown, appealed to the Democrats. As we all know the government shut down. Democrats did this as a way to force a vote on DACA, the executive order issued by Barack Obama granting temporary protection to illegal immigrants brought to America as children. Republicans, trying to force a vote, made it clear that if the CR was not passed needy children would not receive healthcare. Politics is a dirty game but that does not mean that the hypocrisy of both sides should not be exposed and criticized.

This recent debacle (a shutdown is truly a debacle) is but a microcosm representing a broader ideological problem, that can be analyzed through the following question: what separates the Democrats from the Republicans? Using the analogy of a coin, it is nothing but a thin strip of metal. The Democrats and Republicans are two sides of the same ideological coin. And like a coin they cannot exist without the other. The broader globalist system, supported by both parties, as made evident by bipartisan agreements on things such as The War on Terror, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and both sides willingness to engage in a government shutdown highlights this. It is wholly laughable to argue that there are distinct differences between the two parties. And if there are differences, they are surely outweighed by both parties’ desire to maintain hegemonic power in the American political sphere.

What is to be done about this broken and fool-hearty system? From my estimation, support the President. Now for die-hard Trump supporters, there is nothing else to say. President Trump, for all his faults, is certainly not a member of this political establishment. The radical nature of his election can be regarded as a point of condensation. A rally around the radical mysticism of his election.  This type of energy, the infectious energy that spread across the country that “Made America Great Again”, can be harnessed for a broader ideological goal that fosters change. Essentially Trump’s energy can be used for goals either Trumpian or not.

The most important thing to be said here is that one must abandon the cult of pragmatism. The cult that insured Hillary Clinton would win, with all the data, and polls, and mainstream media assurances. Trump has laid a blueprint to attack and dismantle the vast ideological machine that is bleeding us all to death.

Image from Business Insider.