July 2018 Open Thread

Here it is, our usual monthly open thread for all matters that don’t fit into another thread. In theory, it should involve discussion of third parties and/or independents, but as long as you avoid plagiarizing or libeling someone, you should be fine.

Hmmm, is there anything going on in our country that might be worth talking about? Are there people outside of the two major parties who might be able to make a difference? There are a couple of ideas to get you started.

We usually add a video or two at this point. I think I’ll post of favorite of mine that involve some Canadians who understand liberty:

191 thoughts on “July 2018 Open Thread

  1. NewFederalist

    Happy Dominion Day everyone! Yeah, yeah I know it’s been Canada Day since 1982 but Dominion Day has such a nice ring to it! I have avoided this place for many months. Is it any less toxic than when I self exiled?

  2. wolfefan

    Is it worth a post on yet another Ron Paul aide (or perhaps the same one as before) publishing yet another racist and anti-Semitic post/article in Dr. Paul’s name? You’d think that after the last round Dr. Paul would ask his staffers not to put his name to nakedly racist stuff. Hopefully he will publicly name and fire whoever did this. If he doesn’t for me he loses whatever benefit of the doubt remains. At what point does he take responsibility for the people he hires? http://thehill.com/homenews/house/395176-ron-paul-tweets-racist-cartoon-faces-backlash

  3. Anthony Dlugos

    I think its high time we accept the fact that Ron Paul either is racist and anti-Semitic, or at the very least does not have a real problem with either.

  4. Anthony Dlugos

    no, not because he “dares to criticize” Israel.

    Did you look at the cartoon?

    It is horrifically offensive. Its unbelievable.

  5. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I followed Wolfefan’s link, and I truly don’t see anything about Israel in the cartoon. Was it altered maybe?
    Or maybe I just don’t understand it. I’ve never liked cartoons of any sort.

  6. Anthony Dlugos

    no, there’s nothing about Israel. If the cartoon was in reference to Israel’s bad behavior, it might have been okay.

    The cartoon had straight up terribly offensive representations of a Jew, a black person, a Hispanic, and an Asian. The Ron Paul tweet mentioned “cultural marxism,” and changing American culture because of immigrants so its explicitly racist.

    The only good news is Ron Paul is a tired old likely racist coot, and so the Libertarian Party can just allow time to distance itself from him.

  7. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Yes, it is an ugly cartoon, which is why I glanced at it and looked away.

    Yes, Ron Paul is elderly and has his following. He also has tons of grandkids to enjoy.

  8. Anon-Tipper

    lmao Came here to see if people were commenting on Ron Paul’s latest fuck-up. I’m so done with a lot of this.

  9. wolfefan

    Yes, the cartoon is racist and anti-Semitic because of it’s use of terrible racist and religious stereotypes straight out of places like the Daily Stormer and other neo-Nazi outlets. I have no idea of Dr. Paul is personally racist or not. What I do know is that he countenances racists on his staff and has done so for many years. He also does not say the person who posted the cartoon was disciplined in any way. If he’s going to let people post in his name and not seek any approval before the posts go out then he has to accept the responsibility. I think that he would do the liberty movement a favor by retiring and enjoying some well-deserved rest and relaxation. He can be the avuncular uncle and elder statesman of the movement.

  10. dL

    lmao Came here to see if people were commenting on Ron Paul’s latest fuck-up. I’m so done with a lot of this.

    It bears repeating that the actual cultural marxist is the Frankfurt school, Jurgen Habermas protege, Hans Hoppe. If you replace “dictatorship of the proletariat” w/ the “dictatorship of the taxpayer” and “surplus value” w/ “forced integration,” you get Hoppe. Right-wing tankies…

  11. NewFederalist

    I agree that this happens too often with former Rep. Paul’s staff. It’s time he either refutes this stuff and cans his insensitive staffers or just accepts even more marginalization of his beliefs.

  12. Anthony Dlugos

    Sadly, I think the problem with the Ron Paul “movement” goes far deeper than just a few staff members. The problem is a cancer (the origination of which has many possible theories), that has spread so completely through his followers that discovery of such an origination is a trivial matter at this point.

    The cancer is everywhere, so for the libertarian movement, and especially the LP, the only safe course of action is distance. Revocation of his lifetime membership (if possible) would be a reasonable idea, unless someone wants to suggest ignoring him and letting the connection die away is a safer tactic, as it wouldn’t draw attention to our unfortunate past with him.

    I can say this: I volunteered during his 2008 campaign for the GOP nomination, simply because his foreign policy ideas were so spot-on. But, even then, I was disturbed by how pervasive 9/11 Trooferism was in his followers.

    I get that a sizable portion of the population will believe any nutty idea, but this was beyond the typical 20% or whatever who thinks the gub’ment was behind the attacks. Nearly EVERYONE I came in contact with during that campaign thought the government was behind the attacks.

    Something nasty metastasized, and Dr. Paul did nothing to halt its progress. It’s too late to fix now.

  13. Thomas L. Knapp

    I finally met Andy Jacobs.

    We didn’t kill each other. In fact, we shook hands and parted friends.

    He is a wild man who is wrong every time he disagrees with me. But that’s OK.

  14. paulie

    Ron Paul today, Ron Paul tomorrow, Ron Paul forever!

    LOL, is Ron Paul the new way to say segregation?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Wallace%27s_1963_Inaugural_Address

    During that campaign Wallace blamed integration for increases in crime and unemployment, as well as racial disturbances in other states.[5] Asa Carter, founder of a local Ku Klux Klan organization, was hired as a speechwriter for Wallace’s campaign. Carter became a key member of Wallace’s staff, resulting in “a new, fiery, hard-hitting style of campaigning”.[3] Due to his connection to acts of racial violence, Carter was kept in the background during the campaign; however his speeches proved to be popular among Wallace supporters.[6] Wallace’s racial politicking and support of segregation resonated with Alabama voters and in 1962 he was elected governor, receiving more votes than any previous Alabama gubernatorial candidate.[4]

    After his election, Wallace wanted to make it clear he intended to keep his campaign promise to fight against integration. Carter spent several weeks writing the inaugural address, and on January 14, 1963 after taking the oath of office Wallace delivered it from the portico of the Alabama State Capitol. This was the exact place where Jefferson Davis had been sworn in as the President of the Confederate States of America, a fact that was pointedly noted in the speech.

    During the speech Wallace declared:

    “ In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.[7] ”
    Both Carter and Wallace realized that would be the phrase for which his speech would be remembered.[8] The “tyranny” Wallace referred to was his way of characterizing the federal government’s attempts at integration in Alabama. This was one of the central themes of his speech—that by implementing desegregation laws and policies the federal government was oppressing the people of Alabama and depriving them of their rights. During his term as governor, Wallace would receive national attention as he continued to frame segregation as a states’ rights issue, and integration as something imposed upon the South by the federal government.[2]

    The speech also presented the case that racial differences were similar to political or religious differences.[9] Wallace argued that people had “racial or cultural freedom” that gave them the right to live in a culture of segregation, in the same way they had freedom to choose their political party and religious denomination.[10] The “great freedom of our American founding fathers”, Wallace claimed, was that “each race, within its own framework has the freedom to teach, to instruct, to develop, to ask for and receive deserved help from others of separate racial stations”.[1]

  15. Andy

    I saw Tom in passing before, but we never actually spoke until now.

    I would have liked to have talked to Tom a lot longer than we did. Oh well, maybe some other time.

  16. paulie

    Yes, the cartoon is racist and anti-Semitic because of it’s use of terrible racist and religious stereotypes straight out of places like the Daily Stormer and other neo-Nazi outlets.

    Exactly.

    I have no idea of Dr. Paul is personally racist or not.

    Some people have testified that he is not, since he delivered a lot of black babies and remained in touch with many of them and their parents in his community. Others have said he is, but the sources I have heard this from directly are rather disreputable: one is Eric Dondero, who has testified that as Ron Paul’s travel aide he frequently witnessed Ron Paul personally reviewing and co-editing the infamous Ron Paul Newsletters (which contained frequent bigoted writings in a lot more than the few examples brought up in two famous New Republic articles). Another is a well known racist (and ironically, literally a cuckold as well as a pedophile), Tom … forgot his last name, starts with an F, went by Tom Shelly on his “niggermania” website. He was best friends with a petitioner I used to know named Brian Schrier, they were in jail together, then were business partners as well as next door neighbors in 3 or 4 different places. Anyway Tom told me he used to go to weekly meetings where Ron Paul and key Ron Paul staffers met in the DC area with avowed white nationalist leaders. I believe I have read where Don Black of Stormfront has said the same thing.

    In any case, it does not matter whether Ron Paul is personally racist or not. The fact is that he appeals to the white nationalist community, does not in any way discourage their support, and he and his staffers continue to enable the linking of the libertarian and white nationalist movements continuously, much to our detriment.

  17. paulie

    It bears repeating that the actual cultural marxist is the Frankfurt school, Jurgen Habermas protege, Hans Hoppe. If you replace “dictatorship of the proletariat” w/ the “dictatorship of the taxpayer” and “surplus value” w/ “forced integration,” you get Hoppe. Right-wing tankies…

    Yep. I think Hoppe and a few other Marxists figured out that class hatred is failing to stir up the real life working class, and that racial hatred does. By getting blue collar workers and the petite bourgeoisie stirred up over issues of crime, the regime’s token welfare for the poor (ignoring the much more substantial regime welfare to the middle and especially upper classes), and most of all immigration, they enable the state to grow to the point where it becomes totalitarian, just as it did/does in Marxist regimes. Hoppeans and openly fascist white supremacists alike followed a natural course from Ron Paul to Trump, many with a large mix of John Birch Society and Alex Jones propaganda/bullshit in the mix. They delude themselves into thinking they are fighting for liberty when in fact they are working steadily to chip away at what remains of it by tirelessly working to enable the Heimland Security, immigration enforcement, espionage/military/police/prison-industrial complex…leading inexorably to the totalitarian state which is indistinguishable in its features from Marxist prison-nations.

    That’s also why Trump feels such kinship with the likes of former KGB agent Vladimir Putin as well as North Korea’s “dear leader.”

  18. paulie

    I saw Tom in passing before, but we never actually spoke until now.

    Maybe I’m the one with the bad memory but I seem to recall us all hanging out in Denver 2008 and/or other past conventions. Well, glad you all get along in person, LOL.

  19. paulie

    My memory is for shit. Oh well. Here’s a video by Steve Trinward, who I am hanging out with now drinking a box of wine at what used to be the vendor tables outside the main convention hall. Anyone still here feel free to pull up and drink some of my mighty fine wine.

  20. dL

    The Atlantic argues that american exceptionalism is a dead topic in the new political discourse.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/the-left-and-the-right-have-abandoned-american-exceptionalism/564425/

    That would be a major, major shift in the so-called overton window. Actually, if the range of acceptable discourse now encompasses America the failed liberal state and might makes right(i.e., who gives a shit), then there is no overton window. Anything goes…

  21. DJ

    dl: The Atlantic argues that american exceptionalism is a dead topic in the new political discourse.

    Me: It presents a good argument. But, from my perspective, looking at our past, it has never been an argument. Some believed it to be true others didn’t and it was lip service at best by politicians who used it.
    Articles like this may bring it to ‘a’ forefront, but by and large I don’t think many people even discuss it. Maybe they should, but they don’t. There are exceptions to any rule, but using those as the defining metric to make a determination will give a false reading, especially where politicians are concerned- they will use any and all tools to ‘divide’ the populace- maybe that is the exceptionalism and it certainly seems to be a rule. What, IMO, most voters fail to realize is that our politicians will say whatever is necessary to achieve a vote, regardless of how extreme it sounds to one it sounds like good strategy to others. One thing I’ve seen from “conservatives” is the constant barrage of attacks at a personal level by “liberals” which, in my view, has brought conservatives to believe it’s acceptable and they use it just like liberals do, when originally they just wanted conservative politicians to fight back and stop playing nice and giving in to liberal policy they disagreed with. I’ve watched this for years, from afar, and I too felt the same resentment. That’s when I started asking myself why nothing changed when conservatives had control- so, I guess is the overton window real or just another hack trying to be smart- and I’m not trying to be a smart ass, but I do realize that if you aren’t part of the solution you’re part of the problem- the problem is humans. Some feel the need to control others feel the need to be controlled and politicians have good campaign people who use that to an advantage. To me that speaks to education of the human being fed crap when his learning curve was steep and a sponge at the same time. Most people want an instant gratification to a long time/long term situation. We’re living the result.

  22. Anthony Dlugos

    Well, if there is any good news about the Ron Paul’s latest dark stupidity, its that it appears his connection to the Libertarian Party and libertarianism has been buried in the reporting on the story. If we are to go by the links in the Reason article below. (Newsweek calls him the FORMER GOP PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE ). Good.

    We might get lucky because the GOP has tacked so far in the white nationalist direction, that it will only be natural for the general public to connect the Old Coot to his more recent runs for the GOP nomination:

    http://reason.com/blog/2018/07/02/ron-paul-slams-cultural-marxism-with-big

  23. Thomas Knapp

    I’ve seen Andy from a distance before, but never made it a point to talk with him. For one thing, he’s always talking with someone (a good habit for a petitioner to get into) and I never wanted to interrupt. But this time I saw him talking with someone, went over and stood around for a minute until I could get a handshake and hello in. We’ve argued too hard for too many years to not want to know each other.

  24. NewFederalist

    I am very pleased to read about Andy and Tom meeting and getting to know each other. It goes to show that people can disagree about things (some of which are important!) and still get along. Very encouraging!

  25. DJ

    Andy: Carey Wedler: You can love your country without loving your government!

    Me: I’ve read more than a few articles yesterday and today whose comments sections are- uh, entertaining to say the least. It’s amazing at the differences of opinions given. I saw one comment that said the DoI was propaganda. I’ve seen many talk about the racism of the founders, etc.. There was even an article on the federalist by a former Marine who spelled out his beliefs about what America is- of course the opinions by the commenters range from down right ignorant to well thought out, but, someone asked (or posted in an article) what did the commenters love about America- my response was: The concept. That said I saw in a different articles comments (or may be that one) that they would die for America with a counter response that said they would die for the beliefs. I think he was right. Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness is worth dying for. A country, not so much. I don’t get the need to love a country. There are splendid examples of geography everywhere on the planet that I would “love” to see. The bigger the country the more diverse the geography especially in relation to water and the equator and or prehistoric volcano eruptions. Home is where the heart is and has little to do with anything else and most everyone has a reason they love one place over another. Typically that’s because home is where the heart is- we were fortunate enough to be born here but my home is where I hang my hat at the end of the day. If I were to go to another country (which I have traveled quite a bit outside the US in the military and as a civilian) I’m sure that at some point I’d get used to the obvious differences- but I’d probably have the hardest time getting over the lack of the diverse food we have 🙂

  26. DJ

    Does anyone else see what I’m seeing?

    Soros Demands EU Sanctions on Hungary for Resisting Migration
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/29448-soros-demands-eu-sanctions-on-hungary-for-resisting-migration

    Polish Official: “We Will Not Receive Even One Muslim” in Poland
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/29454-polish-official-we-will-not-receive-even-one-muslim-in-poland

    We in the US have a migrant situation also being exploited. There is an eery familiarization taking place.

    Maybe it’s that I’m old. I understand where the opposition is coming from and I see where the proponents are coming from- until you throw in outside influence. That lends credibility to the opponents the proponents don’t have. I have to agree that ‘other’ countries have an ethnic culture they want protected, I get it and don’t blame them as their space/size and economies will be hard pressed to take very many outsiders in and it will dilute their culture. That and people are tribal and growing more so everyday- however, in one of the articles it says the globalist believe the dilution will eventually lead to less war. That is a fallacy. It MAY lead to less state warfare but I think it will lead to more personal conflict which can easily overflow to state warfare- and it is taking on global proportions. I wonder how long before we have a draft?

  27. Andy

    “DJ
    July 5, 2018 at 19:36
    Does anyone else see what I’m seeing?

    Soros Demands EU Sanctions on Hungary for Resisting Migration
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/29448-soros-demands-eu-sanctions-on-hungary-for-resisting-migration

    Polish Official: “We Will Not Receive Even One Muslim” in Poland
    https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/29454-polish-official-we-will-not-receive-even-one-muslim-in-poland

    We in the US have a migrant situation also being exploited. There is an eery familiarization taking place.”

    Yes, and notice how a disturbing number of naive people in the Libertarian Party are on the same side as globalist NWO henchman, George Soros, in that they want to flood European based countries with hostile people from the third word (many of whom are hostile to the culture of these countries), so that they can be used as pawns to destroy these countries. Anyone who thinks that this has something to do with libertarianism, or that this is somehow inline with property rights, is either a) uniformed, b) brainwashed in “political correctness” by the big media and government controlled “education” systems, or c) does not really have the best interests for liberty in mind.

    Fortunately for the people of Hungry and Poland, they have enough people with enough sense to resist this Soros globalist backed invasion, which means that maybe their civilizations will survive. The United Kingdom

  28. Andy

    “Fortunately for the people of Hungry and Poland, they have enough people with enough sense to resist this Soros globalist backed invasion, which means that maybe their civilizations will survive. The United Kingdom”

    I meant to add that other countries in Europe, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Sweden, etc…, may not survive, as in the people who built these civilizations may end up as ethnic minorities in their own countries via mass immigration and a higher birthrate from the migrants, which is ironically being subsidized by their own welfare state. This is a recipe for disaster.

  29. Andy

    This is what happens when a democratic welfare state allows mass immigration from hostile people from the third world. Must see.

    Stefan Molyneux: The Truth About Sweden. Prepare Yourself Accordingly.

  30. paulie

    Robert Montgomerie
    July 6 at 9:39 AM

    This is the controversial report published by CIS that asserts that the majority of ‘illegal immigrants’ are on welfare. It is a deceptive survey compiled in the interests of deceiving naive people and I encourage people to read the actual study and analyse its deceptive language.

    1) It uses the term ‘immigrant’ and ‘illegal immigrant interchangeably when citing welfare use.

    2) It asserts that either group uses children to obtain medicaid and food stamps without explain how they obtained the services.

    3) CIS is a spinoff organization of FAIR, a thinktank cofounded by John Tanner a person who advocates for a majority white ethnic homeland in America and eugenics.

    4) Not only does the survey — a survey of ACS data — based their numbers on estimates, those estimates are rarely represented in ACS data(I know because my book on microeconomics pulls from the same data pool for source material).

    5) SIPP is based off of census data as well but in no way offers a way of clearly discerning things like welfare fraud. The survey information is as dependent on the honesty of the participant as other surveys like the GINI Coefficent.

    I spend a lot of time with these studies mulling through as a part of my trade and it is irritating to see groups like this deceiving the public by claiming these datasets perform things they clearly don’t…
    Welfare Use by Immigrant and Native Households

  31. paulie

    Well, if there is any good news about the Ron Paul’s latest dark stupidity, its that it appears his connection to the Libertarian Party and libertarianism has been buried in the reporting on the story.

    Not if the Woods/Heise/Smith/Ramsey hostile takeover of the LP by the paleo/altreich invaders continues to gather steam. They have established a major beachhead at this convention even though they did not win the chairmanship per se.

  32. paulie

    Sad, but sadly no longer surprising to see Andy approvingly sharing white nationalist propaganda such as Molyneux, Hoppe etc.

  33. Anthony Dlugos

    “Not if the Woods/Heise/Smith/Ramsey hostile takeover of the LP by the paleo/altreich invaders continues to gather steam. They have established a major beachhead at this convention even though they did not win the chairmanship per se.”

    If that’s the case, the best defense is a good offense.

    Can Ron Paul membership be revoked at a Convention? Make them waste their time defending their deity or something like that rather than allowing them to go on the offensive with their alt right flubdub.

  34. Andy

    Well surprise, surprise, another Marxist dirtbag who wants to rip the borders of the USA open, and like that Matt Kuehnel guy who ran for National Chair, he supports ripping the borders open and Medicaid for all.

    I expect this kind of left wing lunacy out of the Democratic Party, but I would have once thought that the Libertarian Party would be above this. If somebody had told me say 18 years ago, that in the year 2018, the Libertarian Party would have a candidate for National Chairman who’d make the main debate stage, and wear a Karl Marx t-shirt, and advocate Medicaid for all, and that anyone in attendance would vote for this person, I’d have told you that you were crazy. This guy did not win, but the fact this guy made it that far is disturbing.

    I would have of course said the same thing about the prospects for Council on Foreign Relations member Bill Weld, and the fact that he actually got nominated for VP, and that people are taking him seriously as a possible LP presidential nomination contender for 2020 is even more disturbing.

    DNC CHAIR: SOCIALIST OCASIO-CORTEZ IS ‘FUTURE OF OUR PARTY’

    https://www.dailycaller.com/2018/07/03/dnc-chair-socialist-ocasio-cortez-is-future-of-our-party/

    From the article: “Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez praised socialist congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as “the future” of the Democratic Party on Tuesday.

    Liberal radio host Bill Press said during a Tuesday interview with Perez that Ocasio-Cortez was able to take out longtime congressman Joe Crowley in the New York primary. Ocasio-Cortez campaigned on abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement and guaranteeing health care and housing as basic human rights.”

  35. Andy

    Just to be clear, I favor transferring the borders, and all taxpayer owned property and infrastructure, over to the hands of its rightful owners, the American citizen taxpayers, and abolishing the state, but this would not create “open borders,” it would create private property borders, and there’d of course be no government welfare programs, since there’d be no government. There’d also be no democratic elections, unless they were held by voluntary organizations, and the results of said elections only applied to those who consented to the election. There’d also be no forced association, so people would be free to discriminate against whoever they wanted, for whatever reason, as in there’d be full freedom of association and disassociation.

  36. Anthony Dlugos

    Daily Caller links now?

    Irony that Andy pejoratively calls Governor Weld a Republican.

  37. DJ

    AD: Daily Caller links now?

    Me: Knowledge isn’t biased in its origin.

    And I’m not an encourager of using the word Democratic when referring to Democrats. Yes, I know blah, blah, blah- but, based on their actions, and personal attacks the Democrat Party doesn’t believe in a democratic process – the slope we find ourselves on is in large part based on words intentionally misrepresenting and the recent (last 2 election cycles) is when the misuse of the Party name became apparent. It’s a part of the dumbing down of the populace that has been going on for decades.

  38. Anthony Dlugos

    Knowledge isn’t biased in its origin.

    I agree, but Andy is the one who sees a conspiracy from every source other than his own mind.

  39. DJ

    This is the controversial report published by CIS that asserts that the majority of ‘illegal immigrants’ are on welfare. It is a deceptive survey compiled in the interests of deceiving naive people and I encourage people to read the actual study and analyse its

    deceptive language.

    Guess I’m not the only one who sees it.

  40. paulie

    who me? p

    Anyone who constantly quotes daily caller, paleo/alt right/WN sources on the one hand and a former Republican governor who held the LP VP nod, yet vouched for the Democratic potus candidate while defending gun laws, no fly lists and other anti-freedom policies, has endorsed and fundraised for many establishment NSGOP and a few establishment Democrats, including very recently and even after running as an LP candidate.

    Just two different flavors of conservative-libertarian fusionism, which while they can’t stand each other, neither is good for LP/LM.

    We need to dissociate completely from NSGOP, conservatism, nationalism, and the reich wing in any and all its manifestations and flavors of BS, pronto, as unmistakably as possible. Let those with Ron Paul prayer candles (seriously) and Trump/Putin icons go elsewhere, and likewise let the Bush/Romneytarians go elsewhere as well.

  41. Anthony Dlugos

    as I noted, I was merely pointing out Andy’s hypocrisy in linking to the Daily Caller.

    I’m quite sure not EVERYTHING that appears at that site is bad.

  42. DJ

    AD: I agree, but Andy is the one who sees a conspiracy from every source other than his own mind

    Me: That’s immaterial to my point. How one uses knowledge determines it’s usefulness. If Andy, or anyone else, posts or cites some source for something if the source is accurate then learn (absorb the knowledge) from the source- attacking a messenger is childish and gets really old really fast.

    Andy is the only one who addressed the links I posted- so, there is some validity to his beliefs other than Daily Caller. The 2 stories I posted are about Hungary and Poland and I suspect they see everything a bit differently than we do. That doesn’t mean the threat isn’t real or their fears not valid or that there is a pejorative influence, which is what claiming conspiracy theorist is in today’s environment- a derogatory pejorative- usually used by those who can’t argue a point or who refuse to ‘learn’ more than they think they know because they already know everything there is to know about everything there is to know about everything there is to know about anything.

    Jesus, you fucking people need to grow the fuck up. I usually don’t tell others what I think they ought to do but i’m making an exception here- you people need to grow up. You sound just like those you want to replace in gov’t- a bunch of school yard smart alec bullies that prefer attacking a messenger because he’s different.

  43. DJ

    Let’s talk pejorative- shall we?

    adjective
    adjective: pejorative

    1. expressing contempt or disapproval
    …………

    troofer : expressing contempt or disapproval of someone who favors truth

    Usually used by those who refuse to acknowledge the nefarious intent of the US gov’t- even when recent History proves beyond a doubt that people are people and will act in manners less than honorable regardless of their station in life. Those who use the term often make the claim they know better but won’t provide corroborating evidence of their knowledge and would rather display their ignorance with a derogatory pejorative to impugn a messenger vs offering contrary evidence as though that derogatory pejorative will suffice because- SMFH.

    A bunch of self righteous hypocrites just like R and D voters and politicians. It’s a wonder all the mirrors around y’all haven’t fell off the wall they’re on.

  44. DJ

    Andy:

    “Fortunately for the people of Hungry and Poland, they have enough people with enough sense to resist this Soros globalist backed invasion, which means that maybe their civilizations will survive. The United Kingdom”

    I meant to add that other countries in Europe, such as the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Sweden, etc…, may not survive, as in the people who built these civilizations may end up as ethnic minorities in their own countries via mass immigration and a higher birthrate from the migrants, which is ironically being subsidized by their own welfare state. This is a recipe for disaster.

    Me: Yeah, Indians felt the same way, as uncivilized as they were. It’s the way of man- adapt or die.

    The people of Poland and Hungary don’t have the economy or room we have. They also have a “culture” which we don’t have.

    Those coming here now, by whatever means, are to me, Karma. This continent was their’s long before it was ours and “we” took it by force of sheer numbers and some rather uncivilized means like disease and starvation-

    The taxes we pay are going to be paid regardless of how we protest and be used the way the gov’t wants to use them- it ain’t our money. It belongs to the fed reserve and we pay user fees with Income Tax- the borrowing puts fed reserve notes in circulation- that is the demon. Not those coming here.

  45. Paul

    For the record, self-described anarcho-communist Matt Kuehnel is not a Marxist. He rejects borders, governments, and other Marxist things.

  46. dL

    For the record, self-described anarcho-communist Matt Kuehnel is not a Marxist. He rejects borders, governments, and other Marxist things.

    Yes, anyone w/ a modicum of “libertarian education” knows the difference between anarcho-communism and Marxism. Indeed, a 19th century anarcho-communist is the one who first coined the term “libertarian.” And I would be remiss not point out again that even many AnCaps are “communist” when it comes to intellectual property. And IP is a big, big part of the 21st century political economy.

  47. ATBAFT

    “in the year 2018, the Libertarian Party would have a candidate for National Chairman who’d make the main debate stage, and wear a Karl Marx t-shirt, and advocate Medicaid for all, and that anyone in attendance would vote for this person, I’d have told you that you were crazy. This guy did not win, but the fact this guy made it that far is disturbing”

    Are you kidding us Andy? This happened? I thought it ridiculous some years ago when a high school girl, with no experience at all, got about 1/3 of the delegate votes running against incumbent chair, Steve Dasbach. Who is electing delegates with such views? Yes, the LP can’t really control who joins, but state parties and members can sure control what kind of nuts end up as delegates. I think our many state ballot status, and ease of running for national offices, is attracting those dying for attention and self-aggrandizement.

  48. Andy

    ATBAFT, it happened. Videos from the convention are online. Watch them and you can see for yourself.

    This clown also said that rent is theft, and that he does not believe in property rights.

  49. Andy

    The left wing lunatics and cucks in the Libertarian Party think that it is OK for the US government to open the door and invite trash like this into the country, and none of these “Libertarian” pussies even have the balls to say that once people like this come into the country, that they should be physically removed, with as much violence as it takes to get rid of them. Some of them may think it, but they are so scared that somebody will call them a “racist” or a “xenophobe” or some other nasty sounding names, that they won’t say it.

    Well, I don’t back down that easy, and I don’t care about political correctness.

    I was in a grocery store today, and I happened to be in line behind some migrants, probably from Somalia I would guess (and I don’t care where they are from, I’d say the same thing if they were from any other country). I saw them pay for their groceries with an EBT card, which is the modern version of food stamps. I was there paying for groceries with my own money which I earned, since I work for a living. Why should I, or any other American, be forced to pay higher taxes, so some foreign leeches can come here and live off of us? It is bad enough when Americans do this, but at least if they are Americans, one could argue that they probably paid into the system, or at least that maybe they had parents or grandparents who paid into the system. I think that it is even worse when a foreigner, as in a late comer, as in a person with no property claim in this country, shows up and rides the welfare system.

    I don’t put all of the blame on the migrants. The government officials, and the lobbyists, and the puppet masters controlling the strings, are largely to blame for this, along with the stupid and ignorant people who vote for these asshole politicians, but I still blame the “immigrants” (I used immigrants in quotes, because these people should more appropriately be called invaders) as well, because they don’t have to come over here and get on the dole. They don’t have to come here and stay on the dole once they are here. They don’t have to accept the welfare handouts (which are stolen loot from the American taxpayers). What kind of fucked up person goes to another country, and lives off of the taxpayers of said country? I understand that these people are doing what is in their best interest to survive, but what about the best interests of the existing American population? I don’t want these people here. I don’t want to pay a penny of taxes to support them. The majority of Americans agree with me. Nobody asked us. This is being done against the will of the majority of Americans. It is all a part of the plan to destroy this country.

    Why should it even be a point of controversy to say that welfare seekers and criminals should be discouraged from coming here, and when they do, they should be physically removed, not rewarded with welfare handouts and other taxpayer funded services, and American citizenship?

    If we lived in a private property anarcho-capitalist society, would any sane property owner want people like this on their land?

    Germany: Migrant Decapitates Baby, Government Tries to Cover It Up
    Authorities raid home of man who posted video

    https://www.infowars.com/germany-migrant-decapitates-baby-government-tries-to-cover-it-up/

    From the article: “Authorities in Germany tried to cover-up the brutal murder of a German woman and a 1-year-old baby girl in Hamburg by an illegal immigrant from Niger by raiding the apartment of the man who posted a video of the incident online.”

  50. Andy

    Excellent! These two should have been on stage at the Libertarian National Convention in New Orleans, to debate proper application of libertarianism in regard to borders and immigration. I’d love to have seen a couple of left wing cucks in the LP: who think that the existence of states means that property norms should go out the window, and that every piece of shit on the planet has a “right” to gain access to the taxpayer funded commons and infrastructure of a country, even if it is against the will of most of the population of said country. The leftists in the LP don’t really give a damn about property rights, they are forced associationists, as in they want the state to impose “open borders” and mass migration onto the population. The fact that commie Kuenhel thinks that ripping the borders open should be a priority issue speaks volumes, as he admits that he does not believe in property rights.

    Like I have said multiple times, the true purist position on this issue is to privatize everything, eliminate the state, and leave the issue to private property owners, as in private property owners would regulate borders and migration in an anarcho-capitalist society. A real libertarian society would not have open borders, it would have private property borders.

    Calling or “open borders” under any other context is a communist/globalist plot.

    Stefan Molyneux & Dave Smith on Open Border Advocates

  51. Thomas Knapp

    I don’t remember what Kuehnel was wearing at the chair debate, but I do seem to recall him wearing a shirt elsewhere with a picture of Marx and the slogan “Marxists Have No Class.”

    I find that interesting for several reasons.

    First of all, I don’t understand why the followers of Marxist ideologue Hans-Hermann Hoppe would have a problem with a picture of the guy whose theory of history Hoppe describes as correct in every respect, although derived from false premises.

    Secondly, while Marx’s goal was a classless society, his actual doctrine was just a distortion/re-purposing of libertarian class theory. He merely replaced Comte/Dunoyer’s productive class v. political class with labor v. capital and moved the class dividing line to put the bourgeoisie on the other side of that dividing line. That distortion was wrong and had evil consequences, but it doesn’t seem especially more wrong or evil in consequence than the “paleo-libertarian” drawing of the class line along ethnic/cultural divides.

  52. Anthony Dlugos

    “Oh look, Andy is posting videos of racists again.”

    I’d be upset about Andy’s non-stop xenophobia and racism if I owned or managed this site, but personally, I don’t get the least bit upset about him or his posts.

    He’s the easiest active poster to just ignore. I love the posts that are like 10 paragraphs of drivel I just scroll by in 1.2 seconds.

  53. Jake Leonard

    Libertarian candidate for Illinois statewide offices were in Quincy and Jacksonville Saturday. The Quincy, IL event was jointly sponsored by the Western Illinois Libertarian Party and the Quincy Tea Party. The Jacksonville, IL event was sponsored by the Morgan County Libertarian Party.
    https://heartlandnewsfeed.com/2018/07/08/libertarian-candidates-make-campaign-stops-in-quincy-jacksonville/

    Received additional coverage from the Quincy Herald-Whig, WGEM-TV, Springfield Daily and the Jacksonville Journal-Courier – links below:
    http://www.wgem.com/story/38593639/2018/07/07/libertarian-candidates-visit-quincy
    http://www.whig.com/20180707/libertarian-candidates-make-case-for-statewide-office
    (Front page – print version) https://www.myjournalcourier.com/news/article/Carrying-the-Libertarian-banner-13057581.php
    Article isn’t yet live for Springfield Daily.

  54. Andy

    Lew Rockwell, or somebody who works with him, must have heard about some of the things that happened at the LP National Convention, because this classic from Hans-Hermann Hoppe was re-posted today.

    I have to wonder how many people in the LP who think that “open borders” is consistent with property rights (it is not), or that it is somehow desirable in a democratic welfare state, or far that matter, is a policy that any sane property owner would enact on their own property, are well meaning but naive people, and how many of them are knowingly working for the destruction of liberty. I suspect that most are well meaning but naive, but I bet that there are some active saboteurs, as in people who do not really have the best interests of liberty in mind, in the mix as well.

    It should be no surprise that the guy who got up on stage with a Karl Marx t-shirt, and said that he does not believe in property rights, and that rent is theft, and that he thinks that there should be Medicaid for all, also thinks that the LP should make ripping the borders open to unlimited immigration a priority issue.

    Immigration and Libertarianism
    By Hans-Hermann Hoppe

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2018/07/hans-hermann-hoppe/immigration-and-libertarianism/

    From the article: “Left-libertarians profess to apply libertarian principles more consistently than other libertarians. In fact, their role is to serve as Viagra to the State. This becomes apparent when one considers their position on the increasingly virulent question of migration. Left-libertarians are typically ardent advocates in particular of a policy of ‘free and non-discriminatory’ immigration. If they criticize the State’s immigration policy, it is not for the fact that its entry restrictions are the wrong restrictions, i.e., that they do not serve to protect the property rights of domestic citizens, but for the fact that it imposes any restrictions on immigration at all.

    But on what grounds should there be a right to un-restricted, ‘free’ immigration? No one has a right to move to a place already occupied by someone else, unless he has been invited by the present occupant. And if all places are already occupied, all migration is migration by invitation only. A right to ‘free’ immigration exists only for virgin country, for the open frontier.

    There are only two ways of trying to get around this conclusion and still rescue the notion of ‘free’ immigration. The first is to view all current place occupants and occupations with moral suspicion. To this purpose, much is made of the fact that all current place occupations have been affected by prior State-action, war and conquest. And true enough, State borders have been drawn and redrawn, people have been displaced, deported, killed and resettled, and state-funded infrastructure projects (roads, public transportation facilities, etc., etc.) have affected the value and relative price of almost all locations and altered the travel distance and cost between them. From this undisputable fact it, though, does not follow that any present place occupant has a claim to migrate to any place else (except, of course, when he owns that place or has permission from its current owner). The world does not belong to everyone.

    The second possible way out is to claim that all so-called public property – the property controlled by local, regional or central government – is akin to open frontier, with free and unrestricted access. Yet this is certainly erroneous. From the fact that government property is illegitimate because it is based on prior expropriations, it does not follow that it is un-owned and free-for-all. It has been funded through local, regional, national or federal tax payments, and it is the payers of these taxes, then, and no one else, who are the legitimate owners of all public property. They cannot exercise their right – that right has been arrogated by the State – but they are the legitimate owners.

    In a world where all places are privately owned, the immigration problem vanishes. There exists no right to immigration. There only exists the right to trade, buy or rent various places. Yet what about immigration in the real world with public property administered by local, regional or central State-governments?

    First off: What would immigration policies be like if the State would, as it is supposed to do, act as a trustee of the taxpayer-owners’ public property? What about immigration if the State acted like the manager of the community property jointly owned and funded by the members of a housing association or gated community?

    At least in principle the answer is clear. A trustee’s guideline regarding immigration would be the ‘full cost’ principle. That is, the immigrant or his inviting resident should pay the full cost of the immigrant’s use made of all public goods or facilities during his presence. The cost of the community property funded by resident taxpayers should not rise or its quality fall on account of the presence of immigrants. On the contrary, if possible the presence of an immigrant should yield the resident-owners a profit, either in the form of lower taxes or community-fees or a higher quality of community property (and hence all-around higher property values).”

  55. Andy

    “Paul
    July 9, 2018 at 05:09
    Oh look, Andy is posting videos of racists again.”

    Oh look, Paul is throwing out weaponized buzz words to try to shut down discussion without making any actual arguments again.

  56. Andy

    Question for Anthony Dlgos: You have admitted that it is not politically viable for a political candidate to declare that the US government should declare “open borders,” and therefore advocate unlimited, no questions ask immigration. This means that you are in fact calling for some immigration restrictions. What immigration policies would you advise a candidate you were supporting to take, or would you have yourself if you were a candidate for political office?

  57. Libertydave

    Andy,

    Your position on closed boarders is a classic example of giving up freedom for the illusion of safety. And you repeating your lies to scare people into giving up their freedoms will only hasten the totalitarian state that you claim to oppose.

    You claim that condo associations and gated communities are great models to emulate for freedom but in order to join these places you have to give up control of your own property. Any changes you want to make to your property you have to get permission from other people.

    That’s not freedom.

    And what do you get for giving up your freedoms? What you get is the illusion of safety. Crimes still happen in these places because evil people don’t care about fences or gates. If they will trespass on private property then they will trespass in condo associations and gated community’s.

  58. Anthony Dlugos

    of course, I don’t have a complete program put together, but I can say that I’ve brought up the successes of the Bracero guest worker program (1942-1964)…even with dyed-in-the-wool Trumpsters…and got pretty positive responses.

    Given that those hostile to immigrants seem to be quite sensitive to the overblown threat that immigrants will “change” America, the guest worker policy sidesteps that fight. And of course, progressives have great sympathy for those on the lower end of the wage scale, so they respond enthusiastically too.

    I’d make that the centerpiece of my answer. All I need to do is get enough people to say yes to that so they will follow me on the more difficult aspects of an open immigration policy.

    IMHO

  59. Andy

    My position is not for “closed borders,” nor is my position decreasing liberty. My position would actually increase liberty.

  60. robert capozzi

    I’m not sure we can say for sure whether open, closed, or reasonably restricted borders either increases or decreases liberty. How would that be calculated? Clearly, visitors’ liberty would be lessened with restrictions. Citizens might well benefit from increased restrictions somewhat, but they might not. But I’d say that should be their choice in the furtherance of their domestic tranquility, which is the basis for liberty.

  61. Libertydave

    Andy your position calls for giving up the freedom to travel just to keep the bad guys out. How is the increasing liberty?

    And for robert capozzi, just look at ICE claiming that the 4th amendment doesn’t apply to them within 100 miles of the boarder. I would say that decreases liberty.

  62. Andy

    Robert, non-citizens have no “right” to travel in the USA. My proposals, which are interim proposals, with the end goal being a private property anarcho-capitalist society, would still have foreign tourists and guest workers (although I do question the need to bring in lots of low skilled workers when there are plenty of Americans on welfare who could be doing those jobs, and there is also emerging robot technology which could be doing those jobs), and would still have some immigration as well. I just want to reform the system so as not to attract Marxists, theocrats, criminals, welfare seekers, and people with communicable diseases. Sure, some people may sneak in anyway, but these people (and any offspring they may have while here) do not have to be rewarded with government welfare and other taxpayer funded services (except maybe emergency healthcare, followed by deportation) or American citizenship.

    Having a system set up that incentivizes a better overall class of immigrants, as in people who are actually productive, and who want freedom, would lead to a reduction of people on welfare, and it would also lead to a reduction in the big government voting block.

  63. Andy

    Nobody is giving up a freedom to travel under my proposal. I do not know what LibertyDave is talking about, and neither does he.

  64. Libertydave

    Notice how Andy in one comment claims that there is no right to travel then in the next claims that nobody is giving up the freedom to travel. You can’t have it both ways. And just because you don’t believe in something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

    Rights are not granted by the constitution or the government, and it doesn’t matter where your born. Everyone has the same rights.

  65. paulie

    Aaron Ross Powell
    July 3 at 3:31 PM
    My dear white nationalist, alt-right, paleo-libertarian, “cultural Marxism”-hating, red-pill-popping dudes,

    America is not abandoning your culture, or what you imagine to be your culture, or what you imagine to be the true American culture, because of some Jewish or black or gay or feminist conspiracy, nor is it because of women or the feminization of men or social justice warriors or atheism or people eating soy.

    American is abandoning your values and your culture because your values and your culture kind of suck, aren’t terribly appealing, don’t contribute much to the world, don’t lead to much in the way of happiness and satisfaction but instead to resentment and rage and cultural and social impotence, and are, frankly, just really, really boring.

    America is over you. Deal with it.

    Aaron

  66. paulie

    David Colborne
    July 11 at 5:04 PM

    If free migration should be opposed because allowing immigrants access to public property violates the property rights of those who do not want immigrants on public property, then ICE and CBP are in violation of the 3rd Amendment because they are quartered on public land without consent.

  67. robert capozzi

    LD,

    When I wrote “Clearly, visitors’ liberty would be lessened with restrictions,” was that somehow unclear to you?

  68. Libertydave

    robert capozzi,

    When I wrote “ICE claiming that the 4th amendment doesn’t apply to them within 100 miles of the boarder” I meant that ICE was claiming that the 4th amendment doesn’t apply to them within 100 miles of the boarder regardless of who they are searching, Citizen or immigrant. which means that liberty is lessened for everybody. Is this somehow unclear to you?

  69. robert capozzi

    LD,

    I note that you’ve not addressed my question…at all. That’s generally a sign of bad faith by an interlocutor. Further, thus far I’ve not commented on 4A and ICE. You have compounded your apparent bad faith with MORE bad faith.

    Unless, of course, I misinterpret your words. Make the case you are not engaged in bad-faith argumentation. Or perhaps you are just making unconscious mistakes.

    Given your apparent bad faith, I don’t have a good reason to trust any facts you offer. I’m not sure whether ICE does what you say, or not. On its face, it sounds bad, certainly. Most of the time, when I comment here on IPR, I’m not commenting on granular matters, but rather on first principles. Get those wrong, or engage in bad faith, and discussion becomes counter-productive.

  70. Andy

    What happens when people sneak into any other country in the world? If they get caught, they get thrown out. This is no different with private property. I have used the example of Disney World as a defacto private city on here multiple times. Sneak into Disney World, or stay beyond your allotted ticket time, and if Disney World Security catches you, they throw you out, and if you have your kids with you, they throw them out as well, and it does not matter if it is the “dream” of your kids to go to Disney World. The initiation of force is from the trespassers. Throwing the trespassers out is retaliation.

  71. robert capozzi

    AJ,

    Surely by now, you know the response of your open-border NAPist colleagues to this, yes?

    Nation-states and their borders are fictitious and illegitimate. On one level, they are correct. Borders are a synthetic construct. But, then, so is private property.

  72. Andy

    Your comment about private property is an excellent point. One could just as easily claim that private property is fictitious. The property lines around the yard are just imaginary lines, therefore I have the “right” to move into your backyard. I disagree with this line of thinking of course, because I support the concept of property rights.

    When it comes to the existence of states, I agree that in an ideal world, coercive states would not exist, but given that they do exist, we have to operate in the world as it is. Even if we lived in a world where coercive states did not exist, it still would not mean that anyone could go anywhere, because there is still the concept of property rights. If one does not believe in property rights, this leads to a world of conflict.

  73. Andy

    Here is another “gift” that is being brought in by mass immigration from 3rd world countries.

    “Open the borders, dude! Share the land, bro. Anyone should be able to cross any border, with no questions asked. Border checkpoints are fascist. We don’t need no stinking health screeners! Health screeners are racist, man. Who cares if people enter illegally? Borders are just imaginary lines on maps, and laws are just politician scribbles on paper. No human being is illegal! Down with the borders! Let all the people from the third world in, bro. They just want to share the love, man. What, you disagree? You must be some kind of racist, man. Now pass me that doobie,” said the naive left-libertarian.

    The deadly parasitic worm that’s set to invade Europe – and it lays its eggs inside human organs
    Schistosomiasis – or bilharzia –is the second most deadly parasitic disease after malaria

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6743224/parasitic-worm-schistosomiasis-lays-eggs-human-organs-europe/

    From the article: “Schistosomiasis currently affects hundreds of millions of people each year, causing thousands of deaths.

    Caused by schistosome flatworms, the infection occurs when people come into contact with a type of freshwater snail that produces the worms.

    These worms then penetrate the skin and live in the blood vessels surrounding the intestines or bladder of the individual.

    When the eggs of these flatworms become trapped in human organs, they can cause inflammation, blindness, scarring, anaemia and ultimately, death.

    Any eggs that make it into the digestive system will be released when the carrier defecates or urinates. If these then reach fresh water, they can hatch and the cycle begins again.

    While Schistosomiasis was previously linked to impoverished parts of South America, sub-Saharan Africa where water hygiene is limited, recent outbreaks were reported on the Mediterranean.”

  74. paulie

    Here’s a perspective on Weld from Brian Ryman, I don’t agree with it but it deserves discussion.


    Brian W. Ryman
    July 12 at 11:40 AM

    Some thoughts on a Bill Weld candidacy in 2020:

    Weld’s baggage is ugly but we can use what is inside it.

    He has the taint of actual experience but unlike other politicians who have succeeded within the establishment he has learned from his errors. In spite of the wailings of new people who have stumbled into the movement after a drunken fraternity bash, Bill Weld HAS profoundly changed his stances on the fundamental issues on which he had differed with libertarian thinking. He has totally renounced his prior position on gun control and now understands that the Second Amendment does more than protect bird guns for hunters. He also understands that the current welfare state is fundamentally flawed and needs to be eliminated and has done so without scapegoating immigrants.

    The Libertarian Party can use his experience and his conversion to our positions to demonstrate that libertarians are not just fringe wackos who are good at condemning but have nothing to offer to get to redemption. He does know how government works and understands the system by which real change is made. Unlike so many in our movement, he understands that ignoring government will not make it fade away.

    Unlike others who are held in high esteem within our movement (e.g., Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard), Weld has never expressed bigoted attitudes about gays or immigrants. He has actually been in the forefront in the marriage equality movement and other social reforms dear to libertarians.

    A couple of points on which some libertarians are unwilling to forgive him:
    *He has friends (Hillary Clinton) who are non libertarians. While this is shocking to some, I have heard about other libertarians that are socially skilled enough to deal civilly with people whose ideas differ from their own. (That said, the timing of his defense of her during his campaign seemed to indicate that he was more fearful of Trump’s success than hopeful for Johnson’s.)
    *His membership in the CFR lets me know that he has an understanding of the world of foreign relations and desires to work with other nations through trade and respect instead of against them with tariffs and threats. Contrary to ideas disseminated by John Birchers and InfoWarriors, the CFR has several mammalian members. It is not comprised of Intergalactic reptilian overlords bent on the destruction of humanity, but is actually an organization founded after the first Great War to keep horrors like that from happening again.

    It is time to stop running away from the legitimacy that is brought to the Party by Bill Weld. We should embrace his experience and competence. While these attributes are alien to the party, they are necessary for actual success.

  75. paulie

    Here is another “gift” that is being brought in by mass immigration

    Look up some of the explicitly bigoted nationalist/nativist propaganda against past waves of immigration such as Jews, Italians, Germans and Irish. It sounded all the same themes of disease, crime, stealing jobs, etc etc that Andy and others are echoing now.

    It was trash then and is trash now. Fearmongering, cherrypicking bullshit, abuse of questionable and worse studies and statistics…it’s all there and it’s all bullshit. What else is new?

  76. paulie

    The libertarian movement and the LP needs to be dissociated from this ugly nationalistic reich wing garbage as quickly and thoroughly as possible. We simply can’t denounce it often or loudly enough.

  77. paulie

    Oh the irony here!

    Mexico’s New Leftist President ‘Builds A Wall’ On Southern Border To Thwart Illegal Immigration

    No irony at all. We told you Marxists love government borders. And yes Hoppe is a Marxist.

  78. Anthony Dlugos

    I know Brian (in the Facebook virtual sense).

    Good content by a good guy.

  79. paulie

    Your comment about private property is an excellent point. One could just as easily claim that private property is fictitious. The property lines around the yard are just imaginary lines, therefore I have the “right” to move into your backyard. I disagree with this line of thinking of course, because I support the concept of property rights.

    Therefore you must also believe in the concept of communal property which in practice as opposed to theory should be administered by the existing state, theoretically as a proxy for the people as a whole. That makes you a communist and a Marxist, like Hoppe who you get these twisted diseased and completely antilibertarian ideas from.

  80. Anthony Dlugos

    “The libertarian movement and the LP needs to be dissociated from this ugly nationalistic reich wing garbage as quickly and thoroughly as possible. We simply can’t denounce it often or loudly enough.”

    I agree, and I suggested a viable tactic; go after their sainted one, the old coot Ron Paul. Move to get his lifetime membership revoked.

  81. paulie

    What happens when people sneak into any other country in the world? If they get caught, they get thrown out.

    There are lots of countries in the world with a high percentage of non-permitted immigration and contrary to the bullshit propaganda of the altreich that Andy echoes it is not just “white” countries, nor is it a plan by Jews, space lizards, globalist elites, Zionists, New World Order or whatever name you use for the same thing. It’s simple economic supply and demand and seeking a better life for one’s kids more free from prosecution, war, tyranny and crime.

    In many countries immigration laws get little enforcement and borders are less policed than the US borders are now.

    But, it’s true that many regime gangs, especially the more totalitarian ones enforce border laws and migration restrictions a lot. Of course many regime gangs enforce gun laws, drug laws, taxes, regulations, etc etc, many of them more than the US regime gang too. Does that make the US regime gang doing so a good thing? Does it make it inevitable forever? Should we oppose these regime transgressions no matter how common they are around the world, just like people opposed slavery, racial apartheid, lack of rights for women and LGBT people, absolute monarchy, church intertwined with state and other things which used to be universal and still exist around the world?

  82. paulie

    This is no different with private property. I have used the example of Disney World as a defacto private city on here multiple times. Sneak into Disney World, or stay beyond your allotted ticket time, and if Disney World Security catches you, they throw you out, and if you have your kids with you, they throw them out as well, and it does not matter if it is the “dream” of your kids to go to Disney World. The initiation of force is from the trespassers. Throwing the trespassers out is retaliation.

    Andy still thinks the whole country should be the private property of the US government, at least until we magically achieve anarcho-crapitalist feudalist utopia just like we had in the good old dark ages. How sad.

  83. paulie

    I’m not sure whether ICE does what you say, or not.

    It does. Please look it up. Links have been given out in many past IPR threads.

  84. Andy

    paulie said: “uly 12, 2018 at 11:43
    And infowars is trash.”

    So are you saying that the story is not true, because it was posted on Infowars? Calling a news site “trash” is not an argument, and does not invalidate a story.

    Infowars is one of the best independent media sites out there, and they are one of the few media outlets with a significant following to give fair coverage to the Libertarian Party.

    I was not wild about Alex Jones getting behind Donald Trump either, but he has backed off on that a bit, and as I have pointed out here before, the 2016 presidential election presented a bad set of options, including voting for the LP’s ticket of Gary Johnson/Bill Weld. It is quite possible that Alex Jones would have gotten behind the LP’s ticket, as he has in the past, if the party had nominated a better ticket. I doubt we’d be any better off if the unlikely scenario of Johnson/Weld winning the election had happened, and in a lot of ways, I think that we’d be worse off, because a Johnson/Weld presidency would have permanently discredited the Libertarian Party and libertarianism in general. Having said this, I do not harbor a grudge against everyone who voted for Johnson/Weld (I do harbor one against Johnon/Weld themselves, and some of the ring leaders behind them), because, like I said, the 2016 presidential race presented such a bad set of options.

    None of this is grounds for discrediting everything that Alex Jones’ operation, which he started as a one man show on public access in Austin, Texas, when he was in his early 20’s, nor should it discredit the work of every reporter he has hired, such as David Knight, who holds a Life Membership in the Libertarian Party. Also, a lot of stories that they post or comment on are re-posted from other media sources.

    If Infowars is trash, then what is MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, etc…? Most alternative media sites are better than the mainstream news media, and I would take Infowars of the mainstream news media any day.

    I’d bet that there are people who’d say that Independent Political Report is trash, but somebody saying this does not make it so.

  85. Anthony Dlugos

    “Infowars is one of the best independent media sites out there…”

    lol.

    I like the “ads” for crushed up chicken bone that promises a cure for impotence.

  86. robert capozzi

    pf: Therefore you must also believe in the concept of communal property which in practice as opposed to theory should be administered by the existing state, theoretically as a proxy for the people as a whole. That makes you a communist and a Marxist, like Hoppe who you get these twisted diseased and completely antilibertarian ideas from.

    ME: You overstate. It COULD lead to Hoppean or other Marxist conclusions, but certainly not necessarily so.

    Georgists are not Marxist, as I see it. They rather suggest that raw materials and land should be viewed as effectively “communal,” but that any value added to raw material and land is private property. This strikes me as a free market stance, and I find it pretty compelling as a model for maintaining domestic tranquility and individual rights, both of which are necessary for a healthy, free society.

  87. paulie

    Georgists are not Marxist, as I see it.

    You are correct. I’ll stipulate tho that Andy is most definitely not a Georgist. His connection to this POV is distinctly Hoppean, which leads directly – or should – to an examination of Hoppeanism’s Marxist roots.

  88. Libertydave

    robert capozzi,

    What question have I not addressed at all? I responded to your comment where you stated that you weren’t sure whether open, closed or reasonable restricted borders either increases or decreases liberty.

    I responded by giving you a real life example of how closed or as Andy like to call it reasonably restricted borders result in less freedom for everybody.

    I guess I didn’t make it clear enough because you responded that you agreed that it would decrease freedom for visitors like that was all I said. So I made it clear that it would decrease freedom for everybody in my next comment to you.

    As for my claim about ICE, it been in the news but in case your to lazy to type into a search engine the following sentence “ICE claims the 4th amendment doesn’t apply within 100 miles of the border” here is the first result that comes up.

    https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone

    ICE believes that being within 100 miles of the boarder is probable cause enough to search anybody and the government is letting them get away with it. By the way nearly 2 out of 3 people live within the 100 mile border zone.

  89. paulie

    Yes, and even more of us have occassion to go there.

    It’s not just the US Mexico border but all land and ocean and Gulf and Lakes borders. That includes some whole states such as Florida and most of the major metro areas in the US. And international airports, inland seaports, etc.

  90. robert capozzi

    LD: So I made it clear that it would decrease freedom for everybody in my next comment to you.

    ME: Also not necessarily so. Assuming your reporting about ICE is correct, it is a massive logic leap to say: ICE does bad things, therefore we should have completely open borders. Right? Do you see that?

    Now, as I see it, the argument seems to be (or should be) about FIRST PRINCIPLES, as I stated earlier. Is it wise to have either:

    a) Completely open borders, or
    b) Some territorial travel restrictions.

    Some NAPists are in the a) camp. I find that an untenable position for several reasons:

    a) It’s political suicide
    b) For the foreseeable future, the job of maintaining domestic tranquility is the State’s, and having some checks in place strikes me as abundantly reasonable. The form those checks take requires negotiation in the Public Square in terms of scope and tactics. I don’t see the point in taking politically suicidal positions. I’m not prepared to defend ICE’s tactics. The one you describe sounds dysfunctional to me, as I find 4A to also be a strong first principle.

    NAPists of the anarchist persuasion are smuggling in their abolitionism into the conversation and attempting to make the broader and more shocking case for statelessness. Charming late-night dorm-room banter after a few bong hits is inappropriate in the political sphere, IMO.

  91. paulie

    As I have said before, myself and almost any other open borders advocate I can think of would be happy to see incremental movement in that direction. While open borders is a position I defend philosophically and will keep doing so, in the real world I welcome an incrementally less restrictive immigration policy, less onerous enforcement, etc.

  92. robert capozzi

    pf,

    Right. One of the many reasons I’m no longer a NAPist is because it MAY be that I MIGHT support stronger enforcement in some areas, depending on what the circumstances were and how they were implemented. OTOH, I’m heavily biased in favor of immigration and freedom of movement. I frankly don’t know enough to say where stiffer enforcement MIGHT be appropriate, but I’m flexible enough in my thinking to be at least open to that possibility.

    For this, many NAPists have told me that that makes me not L. I, of course, beg to differ, mostly because I find the NAP and its application by most NAPists to be utterly untenable. Rigid plumblinery comes across poorly except for the most dogmatic of NAPists.

  93. Libertydave

    robert capozzi,

    If you don’t believe that ICE willfully violating US citizens rights is a bad thing then you and I have very different definitions of good and bad.

    As for you claiming it’s political suicide to advocate for open borders I want to remind you that you also claimed that advocating legalizing drugs was political suicide but as far I can see we are starting to win more and more people over to our way of thinking. This is no different.

    Also you claimed I wasn’t addressing your question. Again what question are you talking about?

  94. robert capozzi

    LD,

    When you wrote “just look at ICE claiming that the 4th amendment doesn’t apply to them within 100 miles of the boarder. I would say that decreases liberty.” my reaction was that’s true IN ISOLATION. I tend to focus on the big picture first.

    We are in agreement about the isolated fact.

    I’ve already said 4A violations are bad. Check 13:46.

    I have not seen any evidence that more people want to abolish all drug laws, no. Weed laws? Yes. I’ve been L since 1980 or so, and for me I see no evidence that Ls are responsible for changing attitudes on isolated issues OR on the overall trends of the relationship between the individual and the State. Overall, the vanguard, hold-high-the banner approach has failed in my estimation. Decades have been squandered on a bad idea when maximizing liberty SHOULD be ascendant.

  95. Libertydave

    Andy,

    You keep trying to hold up Disney World as an example of how our country should be then try to claim the in your ideal world of liberty for all that there would be no such thing a public roads. This is a load of crap and I’m sure Disney World will agree with me over you. You making it harder for tourist to get to Disney World by privatizing all the public roads will hit their bottom line.

    Anyway there will all ways be public roads and it is impossible to trespass on public roads. Most public roads were created by contract between two land owners to facilitate transferring ownership of land from one person to another. This means that most public roads weren’t created by the government stealing land like you want to believe but by people exercising their right to contract.

    You do believe that people have a right to contract or do you believe that this is another right I’m making up like the right to travel?

  96. Anthony Dlugos

    “I want to remind you that you also claimed that advocating legalizing drugs was political suicide but as far I can see we are starting to win more and more people over to our way of thinking. ”

    Not to pick on you in particular, Libertydave, but I must say this is an oft-used argument by Libertarian Party members, on up to leadership (admittedly myself included) and I think it is a problematic attitude, and one that is particularly bad for the LP, because it allows an organization that needs to change to sit comfortable, stuck in its very unsuccessful ways.

    What we, in fact, know is that more and more people are coming around to a position we happen to hold as well. As a party, we have little evidence it was BECAUSE of us. in fact, unless we are getting elected, we would be better off assuming the change you are referring to is happening DESPITE us.

    We get elected, and we get public policy moving in a libertarian direction. Otherwise, we can’t take credit for it. Such an attitude will force us to consider the voters, give up our utopian dreams, and try and meet those voters where they are at.

    Arguing that we get credit for any changes that occur that move this country in a libertarian direction, regardless of whether we are in office or not is a recipe for continued losing. In that case, we can argue for a stateless society, then take credit when Justin Amash (just to use him as an example), gets some law passed that reverses federal encroachment on 4th Amendment rights.

    I reiterate that I have been guilty of this offense myself. But the reality is, if it happens and we weren’t in office making it happen, then we can’t take credit for it.

  97. Thomas Knapp

    RC,

    The US has always had open borders. As a legal matter, they were completely open until 1882. As a practical matter, they’ve been completely open ever since.

    Our choices are:

    1) Open borders; or

    2) Open borders and an expensive, intrusive police state foisted on us via the utopian fantasy that non-open borders are possible.

    We’ve been increasingly choosing the latter for about half a century now (although at least as late as 38 years ago, Ronald Reagan was campaigning for the former), and ramping up our attempts to implement the utopian fantasy has mainly had the effect of revealing how utopian it is and how damaging to ourselves our pursuit of it is.

    The Soviets gave up communism after 70 years or so. Maybe we’ll give up our equivalent utopian suicide pact sooner than that.

  98. Libertydave

    robert capozzi,

    When you say that ICE violating peoples rights is a bad thing is an isolated fact are you saying that there is something else that makes the government violating peoples right a good thing?

    And for the war on drugs, I’m old enough to remember then Nixon first declared the war on drugs. So I was exposed to the same history as you and it doesn’t matter if the libertarian was directly responsible for changing the laws or not. What matters is that people are start to see that we are right that prohibition doesn’t work and just makes things worse. It is just a matter of time before a majority realize that the only alternative to the war on drugs is to legalize it and treat it as a health problem.

    It will be the same with open borders vs closed borders. As the closed borders idiots get there way using fear tactics the government will continue to get worse with the violations of peoples right until people begin to realize that the cure is worse than the disease. Just like the prohibitionist got their way using fear tactics to outlaw alcohol then all other illegal drugs.

  99. Libertydave

    Anthony Dlugos,

    I didn’t say that it was because libertarians got into office and changed the laws. I said we helped convince people that we were right and the laws should be changed. As far you you saying that libertarian can’t claim we helped change the Marijuana laws. That’s a bunch of bullshit. I am a libertarian and I helped legalize marijuana in Oregon. I participated in the marches, I went to the rallies, I donated to the signature drive to get it on the ballot, and I voted to legalize it. I am a libertarian and I help legalize marijuana in Oregon as a libertarian.

    I am more than justified in making the claim that libertarians helped change the marijuana laws and were starting to change all the drug laws.

    By the way I didn’t give credit to the libertarian party. I am giving credit to the libertarian movement. I quit the national party in 2012 when they tried to interfere with the Oregon State party and the only reason I’m a member of the Libertarian Party of Oregon is because state law defines anyone who is registered to vote as a libertarian as a member of the Libertarian Party of Oregon. When I advocate for liberty I send people to the Advocates for Self Government. I don’t send them to the libertarian party because of people like you who are quick to ignore your principles so we can have a chance to win.

  100. ATBAFT

    OK, we are all agreed we don’t want candidates caught unprepared for “What about Aleppo?” questions.
    So, if I were to run for office again as a Libertarian, what would be the best response to give to the reporter who asks what the “LP’s open borders stance would be if, say, Merkel started clearing Germany’s jails of neo-Nazi thugs, and all the other countries who wished to stop housing and feeding criminals, flew those folks to U.S. airports every week? Hi, welcome to the United States? Let me show you where the taxi stand is?”

  101. robert capozzi

    tk,

    Not that it’s relevant, but I see no evidence that RR believed that anyone could go anywhere anytime unchecked. He did call for better cooperation with Mexico, and I happen to agree. 19th century history is also irrelevant, on its face.

    You are apparently using a sleight of hand by saying the “borders” are “open” currently in that there is, for the most part, no walls to the south and north. If so, it’s beneath you.

    Instead, the question for me is: Is it reasonable and does it advance domestic tranquility and the pursuit of happiness of the citizenry to have checks (albeit imperfect ones) to screen out criminals, the infirmed, or those who have the potential to be tax consumers? Do taxpayers and citizens have an interest in minimizing their risks from travelers and resident aliens?

    I say yes.

  102. Thomas Knapp

    ATBAFT,

    If asked such a question, I’d first note that the LP doesn’t have an “open borders stance.” It has a “no unreasonable restrictions” stance. And then you could opine as to what you consider “reasonable restrictions,” but I hope you’d also note that:

    1) In a free market, airlines would be able to refuse to fly planeloads of known criminals to the US; and that

    2) 40 years after the Mariel Boatlift, the US is still here.

  103. dL

    So, if I were to run for office again as a Libertarian, what would be the best response to give to the reporter who asks what the “LP’s open borders stance would be if, say, Merkel started clearing Germany’s jails of neo-Nazi thugs, and all the other countries who wished to stop housing and feeding criminals, flew those folks to U.S. airports every week? Hi, welcome to the United States? Let me show you where the taxi stand is?”

    You know that actually happened in 1980: the Mariel boatlift. Castro emptied out the jails and sent more or less the entire cuban criminal population to Florida. And then the worst possible outcome occurred: they all became republicans! So, even with that, I’m still open borders…

  104. Thomas Knapp

    “Not that it’s relevant, but I see no evidence that RR believed that anyone could go anywhere anytime unchecked”

    You’ll have to take that up with him, or perhaps with his VP, who also campaigned for “open borders” in those words.

    “You are apparently using a sleight of hand by saying the ‘“borders’ are ‘open’ currently in that there is, for the most part, no walls to the south and north. If so, it’s beneath you.”

    I am saying that the borders are “open” currently, that they always have been “open,” and that they would continue to be “open” even if every last inch of the US-Mexico and US-Canadian borders were walled off with 20-foot barriers with glass and concertina wire on top of them.

    The US has 95,500 miles of border and coastline. If someone wants to get in, their chances of getting in without getting caught are about as good as their chances of doing 73 in a 70 speed zone without getting a ticket, and would remain so even if every last member of the US military, federal, state, and local law enforcement was put on nothing but “border security.”

    The effect of border security police state theatrics isn’t to secure the border, it’s to normalize the police state.

  105. robert capozzi

    LD: When you say that ICE violating peoples rights is a bad thing is an isolated fact are you saying that there is something else that makes the government violating peoples right a good thing?

    ME: That’s like asking me when I stopped beating my wife! Beneath you. Beneath me. The police sometimes do things that they should not, but I don’t advocate abolishing all police and all sheriffs, either!

    LD: And for the war on drugs, I’m old enough to remember then Nixon first declared the war on drugs. So I was exposed to the same history as you and it doesn’t matter if the libertarian was directly responsible for changing the laws or not. What matters is that people are start to see that we are right that prohibition doesn’t work and just makes things worse. It is just a matter of time before a majority realize that the only alternative to the war on drugs is to legalize it and treat it as a health problem.

    ME: Perhaps, but we’ll both be pushing up daisies when that happens.

  106. paulie

    The effect of border security police state theatrics isn’t to secure the border, it’s to normalize the police state.

    Exactly.

  107. DJ

    A problem with incremental policing, regardless of the excuse, which in this instance is the borders, is that NO laws are ever intended to be incrementally rolled back. ALL laws open at least 4 doors to corruption enforcement being the most egregious. We have a good long history of prohibition not working and laws used to justify any number of abuses- = corruption.

    I’m not necessarily an open borders advocate, but, I am an advocate of justice being served, which is not what restricting people accomplishes. It punishes the many for the actions of a few based on “what if”, or “in the past”, or “x might happen” and stays merely as a source of revenue for law writers and enforcers.

    I don’t believe the borders need to be secured either- necessarily. But, at some point we do have to wonder when the masses will return to their homes and what will they leave in their wake? I’m not fearful of what might happen as there are too many guns here in the hands of the public that will, at some point, stop the bullshit- if that doesn’t happen then we adapt or die. I’ll die believing in liberty and justice for all, protected and defended here as a dying breath- regardless of how my death happens. But, if forced, by anyone, to accept what I am wronged by their will be a retaliation at least equal to the force applied to the best of my ability. Currently there are “laws” that deal with criminals that incarcerate those of victimless crimes- and the evidence is obvious the laws are abused by the enforcers and the jurist to ensure a profit or a vote= corruption which is where I focus my discussions- how the party does their thing is their business and illustrates why I refuse group affiliation.

  108. robert capozzi

    TK,

    You are being hyper-literal again. RR may have used the term “open borders,” but he didn’t mean it the way YOU mean it.

    I found this quote of his, for ex:

    “Rather than talking about putting up a fence, why don’t we work out some recognition of our mutual problems? Make it possible for them to come here legally with a work permit—and then while they’re working and earning here, they pay taxes here. And when they want to go back, they can go back. And open the border both ways by understanding their problems.”

    You oppose “work permits,” yes? You don’t need no stinking badges, right? 😉 You oppose taxes, too, not just on resident aliens, but everyone, yes?

    RR’s phrase here is “open the border both ways” differs from your shining anarcho city on a hill open borders. He was pointing to making it easier to visit, trade, and work between the two nations. He’s not MY authority (yours?!), but I do believe I agree with him on that one.

    Did he mean he supported emergency rooms being flooded with illegal aliens seeking medical attention on the taxpayers’ dime? Unlikely. Do I think taxpayers should be on the hook to educate illegal alien children? I can tolerate in theory SOME of this, but if gets too burdensome, no.

  109. DJ

    RC: Perhaps, but we’ll both be pushing up daisies when that happens.

    Me: But your offspring will know you for what you leave behind.

  110. robert capozzi

    DJ

    No offspring. Dodged that bullet.

    Legacy arguments I find to be weak. For me, the question is always How can I make this moment better?

  111. paulie

    Perhaps, but we’ll both be pushing up daisies when that happens.

    Maybe. Maybe not. Big changes usually happen as a punctuated equilibrium. I have a sense that we are near a tipping point.

  112. robert capozzi

    Yes, PF, I’m hearing that the Frankel Singularity may come in late July! 😉

  113. paulie

    Yes, PF, I’m hearing that the Frankel Singularity may come in late July!

    I don’t know when exactly and I certainly did not come up with the concept. I’d suggest reading more of the original works on it though before being dismissive. I think assuming you will be pushing up daisies is wrong. I’d also suggest reading a lot more about punctuated equilibria before being dismissive.

  114. robert capozzi

    pf,

    Oh, I have every reason to believe that we both will be pushing up daisies eventually. The question is: Will ALL drugs be legal in 10 years or so, when my light will likely go out. Not holding my breath on that one!

    As for punctuated equilibria and paradigm shifts, I’m a believer. Same-gender marriage is a great example, although IIRC the Supremes did the heavy lifting on that one. +1 for them. Gayness has always been with us, I suspect, but some decades of out-of-the-closet activism probably normalized the issue, allowing the Supremes to do their thing.

    The desire to get high also has probably always been with us, and yes there have been some strong cultural attempts to normalize that. My sense, however, is — for whatever reason — even more taboo than alternative lifestyles.

    I’d be happy to be wrong in my assessment.

  115. paulie

    The question is: Will ALL drugs be legal in 10 years or so, when my light will likely go out. Not holding my breath on that one!

    I think the odds are a lot better than you do that

    1) Yes it will happen in 10 years
    2) You will live a lot longer than you now think you will

    But regardless of whether either of those are true I will fight for both long and short term advances in freedom both short term and long term. All our freedoms, all the time. But we will take what we can get by whatever means we can live with.

  116. ATBAFT

    “If asked such a question, I’d first note that the LP doesn’t have an “open borders stance.” It has a “no unreasonable restrictions” stance. ”
    Yes, I see that in the 2016 platform. I recall someone on this blog saying the 2018 plank on immigration had been changed. What does the 2018 plank say? I suppose a Libertarian candidate could determine for herself what constituted “unreasonable restrictions” and it would encompass virtually all the restrictions various people here have advanced concerning “open borders.”
    My experience is that many of our candidates seem to run “from” the platform and not “on” the platform. Why is this? Admittedly, not many reporters read the platform and form “gotcha” questions, but I have heard questions like “So the Party would not oppose heroin being sold next to school yards?” And imagine, like I heard at the 2008 convention, what a Barr supporter forecast: “Do you want to defend Mary Ruwart’s claim that children may be able to consent to appearing in pornographic films?”

  117. robert capozzi

    PF,

    I never understood the desire to live longer and longer. For me, I hope it’s 70 and out.

    Journeys always involve one step at a time. Instead of raving about Miami while trudging from Barrow, maybe you’ll decide that Chicago is the place to be when you get there. Or Atlanta.

  118. Thomas Knapp

    RC,

    Yes, I oppose “work permits,” as all non-communists/non-fascists used to (as late as after Tiananmen, the Chinese Communist Party’s “work permit” scheme was greeted with general horror by American readers of Shen Tong’s Almost a Revolution).

    And let’s be clear here: “Work permits” aren’t just for immigrants, they’re for all of us. What do you think you’re applying for when your new employer tells you he needs proof of citizenship before he can put you on payroll?

    And yes, I oppose taxes.

    And yes, I support recognizing that we have open borders instead of supporting the utopian fantasy that if we just let the police state get big enough, it a) can protect us from the furriners and b) won’t threaten us.

  119. Thomas Knapp

    “I recall someone on this blog saying the 2018 plank on immigration had been changed. What does the 2018 plank say?”

    It says the same thing as the 2016 plank, minus the train wreck of a last sentence.

  120. robert capozzi

    TK,

    I don’t know if you are serious or if you misunderstand me, but I’d like to see the police state smaller than it now generally. Abolition of it strikes me as the utopian stance.

    I’m guessing you don’t believe in “citizenship,” so in Knappland one could not be asked for something that no one has. But in this world, there is a distinction between a citizen providing his/her SS card and a work permit for a legal alien. Add abolishment of SS, its card, and it being a work requirement to the post-Frankel Singularity regime, eh?

  121. Thomas L. Knapp

    RC,

    I’d hate to see your monthly straw bill.

    In this world, the credentials required for a work permit differ for different classes of people. If you’re an immigrant, you need a specific kind of visa. If you’re a non-professional native worker, you need two forms of ID from different lists to prove “citizenship.” If you’re a professional native worker, you likely need those things plus an MD, or a cosmetology license, or a bar membership card, or whatever. They’re all work permit requirements, just like the Operator’s License requirement and Commercial Driver’s License requirements are both driver’s license requirements.

  122. paulie

    ATBAFT:

    2016 platform: We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.

    2018 platform: We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.

    P: It’s still in there. Just that much misconstrued last sentence has been removed.

  123. paulie

    I never understood the desire to live longer and longer. For me, I hope it’s 70 and out.

    You would still say that if your quality of life doesn’t go down?

    Journeys always involve one step at a time. Instead of raving about Miami while trudging from Barrow, maybe you’ll decide that Chicago is the place to be when you get there. Or Atlanta.

    I always have said the same thing.

    But if you mean that in regards to lifespan I’d rather have the option to go longer. I’ve already lived a lot longer than I once thought either in any way probable or desirable. Having made it thus far I want to go a lot farther.

  124. paulie

    Add abolishment of SS, its card, and it being a work requirement to the post-Frankel Singularity regime, eh?

    I’ll drink to that.

  125. Anthony Dlugos

    Quoting Libertydave,

    “By the way I didn’t give credit to the libertarian party. I am giving credit to the libertarian movement. I quit the national party in 2012…When I advocate for liberty I send people to the Advocates for Self Government. I don’t send them to the libertarian party because of people like you who are quick to ignore your principles so we can have a chance to win.”

    Fair enough. I commend you on your principled stance, and following through on it by quitting the party. You’re probably happier and, more effective to boot. My criticism does not apply to you, only to members of the Libertarian Party.

    Just to clarify, I don’t ignore my MY principles. My principles include the obvious for a political party: that we have to get elected FIRST in order to move public policy in a libertarian direction, and that the only metric for measuring success is votes counted.

    Frankly, I don’t care what variety of libertarianism you wish to advocate for if you join the party; only that you understand the rules of the game you are voluntarily choosing to participate in.

    Advocate for, say, the complete elimination of all border controls, the abolishment of all federal welfare, Medicaid and Medicare, and an immediate end to the drug war whilst releasing all nonviolent drug offenders. All you have to do is find the audience (votes/delegates/etc) for such a message. Don’t wax poetically if you can’t; these are the rules of the game.

  126. robert capozzi

    TK: In this world, the credentials required for a work permit differ for different classes of people.

    ME: I’ve not said otherwise. Guest worker permits, though, are for non-citizen guest workers. Now, I suspect that when Zomians go to Somalia or vice versa there’s no permitting, but I’m not sure that such reciprocal regimes can or should be exported to non-stateless territorities, at least anytime soon.

  127. Libertydave

    ATBAFT,

    If your going to ask “gotcha” questions you might want to pick better questions that those lame excuses you gave. When you get “gotcha” questions you need to put your answer in a way that put them in the defense of the evils their position causes.

    For example when someone asks “So the Party would not oppose heroin being sold next to school yards?” You answer, “Having is sold next to school property is better than where it’s being sold now, in the bathrooms on school property. At least the stores will ask for ID to keep these drugs away from the children. Illegal drug dealers use children to sell their drugs.”

    And your question “Do you want to defend Mary Ruwart’s claim that children may be able to consent to appearing in pornographic film?” You answer, “Having these cases handled on a case by case basis is better than labeling a 15 year-old teenager a sex offender for the rest of his/her life because he/she took a nude picture or video of themselves to send to their Girl/Boy friends.”

  128. ATBAFT

    LD, good: those are the kinds of answers we need candidates to be ready to use. Used to be called “The Ransberger Pivot” if I’m not mistaken.

    It looks like dropping that last sentence from the immigration plank just got rid of some qualifiers that one would be free to use under the “not unreasonable constrained” wording. Now it becomes a debate on whether or not a constraint is reasonable or not.

  129. Thomas L. Knapp

    “It looks like dropping that last sentence from the immigration plank just got rid of some qualifiers that one would be free to use under the ‘not unreasonable constrained’ wording. Now it becomes a debate on whether or not a constraint is reasonable or not.”

    Well, not so much a debate as a plank that leaves candidates free to offer “reasonable constraints” they want to offer, without platform language lurking behind them that can be (and has been) read as putting their party in support of en masse bans on the basis of ethnicity, religion, national origin, etc.

    Without trying to assume too much credit here, I ran for platform committee on a pledge to work for precisely this change and no other to this plank; I argued for this change and no other on the committee,
    the majority chose this change and no other for its report, and the delegates chose this change and no other.

    My intent, clearly expressed at all points, was not to create an “open borders” plank, but to remove language that I had seen party members of an “alt-right” bent (for lack of a better term) use to claim LP support for Trump’s “Muslim ban.” And I think that was why the change passed with a clear super-majority of delegate support.

    The delegates had these options:

    1) To pass the committee proposal (this one);

    2) To instead pass a minority report that fixed the main problem with the sentence — the one that caught my attention — by adding the word “individual” before “foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property;”

    3) To pass a second minority report that mined old platform language for an “open borders” plank;

    4) To just do nothing; or

    5) To amend the plank from the floor.

    I’m glad they thought the committee’s majority offered the best proposal. I didn’t choose to shoot for an “open borders” plank for two reasons. One was that I doubted it would pass. The other was that I think there’s room in the LP for otherwise sound libertarians who happen to be benighted on the subject of immigration.

  130. dL

    It looks like dropping that last sentence from the immigration plank just got rid of some qualifiers that one would be free to use under the “not unreasonable constrained” wording. Now it becomes a debate on whether or not a constraint is reasonable or not.

    Technically, the platform language specifies a reasonable constraint for crossing borders when escaping political tyranny. However, for economic migration, the language holds to no restrictions. So, if you are crossing the border to pick fruit, no restrictions. However, if you crossing the border to flee political persecution, you are subject to a reasonable constraint. Yes, that’s a silly distinction. Of course, conservative appeasement is silly.

  131. dL

    The other was that I think there’s room in the LP for otherwise sound libertarians who happen to be benighted on the subject of immigration.

    Rarely is a xenophobe an otherwise sound libertarian. Sort of like an atheist being an otherwise sound christian.

  132. Andy

    There are long term goals, and there is what to do in the interim.

    I have no problem with Libertarians saying that the long term goal is to establish a private property anarcho-capitalist society, and that in such a society, immigration/migration would be regulated by property owners.

    Reality is that we do not live in a private property anarcho-capitalist society, we live in a defacto democratic welfare state with forced Association laws and lots of public (ie-taxpayer funded) property and infrastructure. Reality is also that enemies of liberty in our society are using mass immigration as a weapom, as in they are intentionally flooding the country with people who disproportionately support bigger government, more welfare, and more gun control laws. Therefore, the sensible, pro-liberty interim policy should be to advocate that the government stop inviting people like this into the country, and if they sneak in anyway, or if they lie about their intentions when coming here (as in they claim to be peaceful, but then turn out to be Marxists or theocrats or criminals or welfare seekers), that the government not reward these people with welfare and citizenship, and, in at least the most severe cases, the government should physically remove these people from the country. People with communicable diseases should also be blocked/kicked out of the country.

  133. Thomas L. Knapp

    “There are long term goals, and there is what to do in the interim.”

    True.

    I think we should do libertarian, rather than authoritarian Marxist, things in the interim.

    You disagree.

  134. dL

    I think we should do libertarian, rather than authoritarian Marxist, things in the interim.

    Yes, replace “dictatorship of the proletariat” w/ “dictatorship of the taxpayer” and “surplus value” w/ “forced integration,” and you have Marx/Engles. Because this crap originates w/ Hoppe, I don’t think that is an accident. Of course, given that everyone is a taxpayer(if you buy a stick of gum, you are a taxpayer), I suppose one has to resort to the old Animal Farm cliche, “all taxpayers are equal but some are more equal than others.” And the most equal taxpayers would be people like the Koch brothers, Bill Gates, George Soros, Jamie Dimon, Mark Zuckerberg et al…you know, card carrying members of the new world globalist order. So the globalists(who overwhelmingly pay the most taxes) decide who associates w/ whom, and if they are guilty of fostering “forced integration” on the plebes, well they are only exercising their legitimate dictatorial authority. That’s the obvious flaw w/ Hoppe’s dipshit Marxist rip off. Who says the “taxpayer dictatorship” has to impose forced segregation? They would impose what they’ve been imposing, which apparently is, forced integration. You either have to have an IQ lower than eskimo ice pop or be a flaming bigot to swallow this idiocy.

  135. paulie

    Yes, replace “dictatorship of the proletariat” w/ “dictatorship of the taxpayer” and “surplus value” w/ “forced integration,” and you have Marx/Engles. Because this crap originates w/ Hoppe, I don’t think that is an accident.

    Precisely. Hoppe is an acknowledged Marxist. He noticed that real life blue collar workers rally around racial nationalism, not class warfare. Therefore he uses that to coral them into fighting for a communal property regime in the name of preserving their race and nation, blood and soil. All under the guise of eventually instituting a stateless (White/Workers) paradise, just like Marx and Engels did, while in reality enabling a totalitarian police state to rule in their name.

    Rothbard added the touch of Leninist tactics while praising the likes of Strom Thurmond, Patrick Buchanan and David Duke. Together with Gary North, Hoppe and Rockwell hold forth a terrifying vision of the feudal dark ages mixed with Old Testament/fundamentalist Mormon style patriarchy under the guise of “anarcho”-“capitalism,” cobbled together by Ron Paul idolatry morphing into Trump-Putin idolatry and retrograde absolute monarchism, in reality a sort of mix between the governments of North Korea and Saudi Arabia. Whipping the masses with fundamentalist religion, racial animus and other forms of bigotry, and pining for a mythologized golden past, the Rockwell-Hoppeans sneak Marxist dictatorship in through the back door for the win.

    Hence you get “Libertarians for Trump,” “blood and soil libertarians,” etc. The saddest thing of all is how these altreich/paleolithic types have fooled so many into believing they are the “real libertarians” and that actual libertarians are “fake libertarians” or “LINOs.” Now all they need is some Alex Jones/David Icke paranoia to short circuit the rational mind and they have it made. A little bit of yahoo bullhorn yelling and red faced neck vein bulging, confirmation bias and painting everyone who disagrees as agents or dupes of a global conspiracy that spans the ages. Are we there yet?

  136. paulie

    Culture always evolves, cultures and peoples always mix and cross-fertilize. If it wasn’t for cultural appropriation and emigration/immigration no culture, ethnicity, country or people in the world would exist anything like it is today, if at all. The economy would still be literally in the stone age. The “paleo”(lithic) and nationalist reactionary movements and the alt reich seek to take us back there.

  137. robert capozzi

    PF,

    Yes, culture is like the weather. It’s ever evolving, and it’s another example of the spontaneous order at work. “Mises” folk that want to steer the culture seem to have forgotten their basic economics.

  138. Paul

    Paulie,

    I believe definitions in informal language should be more descriptive than prescriptive. If most people define libertarians as “bake the cake” “blood and soil” anti-abortion anti-travel anti-trade types, then that’s what they are, even if that historically wasn’t the case.

  139. Andy

    I am attacked by trolls the most because I am the biggest threat to the state.

    If you are not being attacked by trolls, it is a sign that you are not a big threat to the state.

  140. Paul

    Andy,

    I generally disagree. But I’m just surprised they post IPRX and porn links under your name, especially since you seem closest to IPRX among local contributors.

  141. paulie

    I am attacked by trolls the most because I am the biggest threat to the state.

    Nathan Norman seems to like you. Take a look at IPRX, he is your biggest fan. He also likes David Duke, Richard Spencer etc.

  142. paulie

    Paulie,

    I believe definitions in informal language should be more descriptive than prescriptive. If most people define libertarians as “bake the cake” “blood and soil” anti-abortion anti-travel anti-trade types, then that’s what they are, even if that historically wasn’t the case.

    You may well be correct. If libertarianism is coming to mean alt right I am no longer interested.

  143. DJ

    A New World Order

    “There are no nations. There are no peoples … There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably determined by the immutable by-laws of business.”—Network (1976)

    There are those who will tell you that any mention of a New World Order government—a power elite conspiring to rule the world—is the stuff of conspiracy theories.

    I am not one of those skeptics.

    What’s more, I wholeheartedly believe that one should always mistrust those in power, take alarm at the first encroachment on one’s liberties, and establish powerful constitutional checks against government mischief and abuse.

    I can also attest to the fact that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

    I have studied enough of this country’s history—and world history—to know that governments (the U.S. government being no exception) are at times indistinguishable from the evil they claim to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

    And I have lived long enough to see many so-called conspiracy theories turn into cold, hard fact.

    Remember, people used to scoff at the notion of a Deep State (a.k.a. Shadow Government), doubt that fascism could ever take hold in America, and sneer at any suggestion that the United States was starting to resemble Nazi Germany in the years leading up to Hitler’s rise to power.

    We’re beginning to know better, aren’t we?

    https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/a-new-world-order/

  144. paulie

    Jonathan Loesche
    July 15 at 10:04 PM

    Let me get this straight. The Libertarian Party of Florida cancelled the Daytona Beach venue because we’re expecting attendance to double the previous record when there are zero state wide candidates for the first time in a decade, an off year for officer elections, and nothing planned from presidential candidates.

    I am sure this will turn out well.

  145. paulie

    Florida LP moving its convention expecting more than double past record attendance “when there are zero state wide candidates for the first time in a decade, an off year for officer elections, and nothing planned from presidential candidates.”

  146. paulie

    Libertarian Party of Louisiana
    1 hr
    Earlier this year, the Libertarian Party became the first notable national U.S. political Party to address sex work in its platform, calling for the decriminalization of prostitution and other sexual services between consenting adults.

    Less than two weeks later, police arrested three women in Gonzales, LA for giving sexual massages to consenting adults. The Libertarian Party believes that the only valid purpose of law is to protect natural rights and that sexual services between consenting adults do not violate these rights. Libertarians assert that if there is no victim, there is no crime. It is a common belief among Libertarians that the resources spent toward policing victimless crimes would be better used in preventing crimes that do violate natural rights such as rape, theft, assault, and murder.

    On Sunday, July 15, Libertarians held a small protest in Baton Rouge, speaking out against what they feel are unjust laws regarding sexual services. “If sex workers are truly victims, why are we arresting them? If people truly want to help put an end to sex trafficking, they should do what’s been proven to work in other countries – decriminalization,” said Sarah Stewart, a Louisiana resident and sex worker activist.

    Stewart cited a study done by the National Bureau of Economic Research which found that while decriminalization of sex work caused no increase in crime, it did decrease cases of forcible rape by 31%. “Many of the problems surrounding sex work stem from the criminalization and over-regulation of the industry. Laws don’t prevent sex work, they only drive it underground,” said Stewart.

    “Libertarians call for an end to all laws creating crimes without victims. Decriminalization of prostitution and other sex work has been shown to lower cases of sex trafficking and decrease instances of rape. But mostly, it’s none of my business what consenting adults do so long as they don’t hurt anyone or take their stuff,” said Keith Thompson, Communications Officer for the Libertarian Party of Louisiana.

    The Libertarian Party is running a record number of candidates for local, state, and federal offices in 2018 with a focus on fiscal restraint, criminal justice reform, and reducing the size and scope of the government.

  147. Andy

    “For the record, self-described anarcho-communist Matt Kuehnel is not a Marxist. He rejects borders, governments, and other Marxist things.”

    Yet he called for Medicaid for all, and he called rent theft, and he said that he does not believe in property rights, all while wearing a Karl Marx t-shirt on stage.

  148. Andy

    “Anthony Dlugos
    July 11, 2018 at 14:27
    of course, I don’t have a complete program put together, but I can say that I’ve brought up the successes of the Bracero guest worker program (1942-1964)…even with dyed-in-the-wool Trumpsters…and got pretty positive responses.

    Given that those hostile to immigrants seem to be quite sensitive to the overblown threat that immigrants will ‘change’ America, the guest worker policy sidesteps that fight. And of course, progressives have great sympathy for those on the lower end of the wage scale, so they respond enthusiastically too.

    I’d make that the centerpiece of my answer. All I need to do is get enough people to say yes to that so they will follow me on the more difficult aspects of an open immigration policy.”

    This makes more sense than the fools who say things like, “Rip the borders open, dude. Let everybody in, bro.,” while being completely oblivious to all of the other policies that are in place, as well as being oblivious to political reality.

    Like I have said many time here, the real purist libertarian stance on this issue is not about opening up immigration, it is about private property, as in privatize all land, and leave the issue up to private property owners. Some property owners may chose to have very lax migration policies, while others may chose to have policies that are very restrictive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *