/liberty/ - Liberty

We should opt for the LIBERTARIAN ARISTOCRACY

I just farted

>>74114

If public property is nonexistent (or at least severely limited), and property owners were allowed to practice their freedoms of association and dissociation, open borders are a non-issue. However, public property is everywhere (including transportation, the critical one), and nondiscrimination laws prevent private property owners from practicing their rights. Because of these factors, borders are an imperfect but necessary solution to unwanted immigration.

If you could remove the factors making immigration threatening (public property and nondiscrimination laws), or remove the incentives prompting mass immigration (welfare and other public services), then open borders would be okay. However, changing any of the above is far outside the overton window, and by the looks of things will stay there for the time being. Until that stops being the case, establishing borders is the most practical solution.

>>74131

>Implying there wouldn't be public property in Ancapistan.

>Implying most major cities aren't cosmopolitan hubs.

This argument is okay, but it doesn't restrict immigration enough for most right wingers.

>>74171

Really in "anarcho-X" the anarcho represents a political ideology and the X part represents the economic system as far as I'm concerned. Pretty much there's four anarchisms:

Anarcho-Communism/Socialism (same thing)

Anarcho-Syndicalism

Mutualism

Anarcho-Capitalism (Voluntarism/Vluntaryism)

Everything else is just a descriptor of social problems or means of achieving one of the four above states. Anarcho-Individualism describes Mutualism, Agorism describes either AnCap or Mutualism depending, Anarcho-Primitivism and Anarcha-Feminism describe either Syndicalism or (usually) Communism, etc. The only three Anarcho-Xs that have a hard time fitting into one of those four categories is Christian Anarchism (because some of us are commies while others are AnCaps), Anarcho-Pacifism (because they generally aren't tied to one economic ideology), and Anarcho-Transhumanism (because half of them are commies while the other half are AnCaps).

Honestly though, everything other than AnCap, Mutualist, and Syndicalist are a meme.

>>74114

I don't understand how borders are "ideologically impure" (for a Marxist maybe?), the nation is an extension of our private property, by removing borders you are making the nation common to everyone, what is the point of working to improve the nation and the conditions of everyone already living in it when any Somalian can just walk in and reap what we have been sowing for generations?

It's like spending your whole life building a beautiful house for yourself and your children who will inherit it, but it becomes occupied by hobos, vandals, graffiti artists, prostitutes and drug addicts.

It's also the same as with public toilets, as long as you aren't the one cleaning the mess, you won't really care even if you shat on the wall and pissed on the ceiling.

>>74175

National borders implies a nation which implies the government has sovereign control over a contiguous area of land, which is effectively ownership. Meaning there is a government which 'owns' (or has policing power over) land, which isn't very anarchist.

That being said, It's sensible to refuse undesireables entry into your community and I think it could be done without taxes and thugs with badges.

>>74263

>a nation is a government

Nations can exist without governments. The nation and the state are two different things, don't mix them.

If I get someone to build a fence around my property, I'm still the owner of the property, not the guy that built it and not the dog that I assigned to guard it. Borders are just places on a map that PMCs will be paid to patrol, no one will have "sovereign control" over the land unless someone will be powerful enough to take it by force.

>>74174

is anarcho-primitivist a meme?

Borders are oppressive

>>74279

abolish border between your internal organs and world and cut your veins

Immigrants are fine when your economy is in a phase of rapid expansion. Europe's problem was acting with its heart, rather than its head. A tragically common European problem, one we've strived to emulate to out own ruin.

Immigrants in a stagnant or slowly growing economy only create violence. If you have no fucking jobs… and you have a bunch of darkies on your streets with nothing to do… it's gonna lead to violence. Simple as. They become fodder for the hard right in doing so. This is why stagnant economic conditions lead to increased proliferation of fascistic viewpoints. It's a self-reinforcing problem that feeds into its own. Germany hasn't even managed 1.5% gdp growth per annum over the last twenty years. It had no business taking on such level of immigration. It suffered as a result. Again, thinking with the heart, rather than the head. The idea was that immigrants would drive consumption patterns and lead to economic growth as a result - but guess what - POOR PEOPLE DON'T BUY SHIT THEY EAT WELFARE SERVICES!

In a true world economy immigration patterns would purely be mediated by economic patterns. Areas in boom would attract great numbers of immigrants who would avoid areas in bust. The existence of border controls serves in a way to counter this. Immigration patterns aren't national, they're regional. But they're treated on a national level when in reality regional control over immigration patterns would serve well to reduce many of the problems people associate with immigration. The industrial shitholes get all the immigrants and the places people like to live remain reasonably homogenous. Everyone wins.

It's not like that, though. To move to any other region outside your home means embracing an entire nation's ideals. It means becoming a national statistic on a federal level. And then people who do think they're entitled to all of it, leading to conflicts with the natives.

The solution to the border issue is increased decentralization and manipulation of immigration patterns on a regional level. The market will naturally set immigration patterns according to regional demand for laborers rather than national boom/bust cycles. Insular communities can set their policies tightly and financial centers can set their policies loosely. People within their communities have more say over the people who come into them, and it would spur debate discussion within local communities rather than internet messageboards. It would reduce the sense of detachment people have with modern democracy.

Won't happen though.

>>74279

Abolish border between penis glans and AIDS-infected rectum.

>>74174

u forgot about anarcho-feudalism m8 :^)

a democracy cannot function with open borders, the actual system for voting collapses

democracy is shit anyway

>>74461

> the actual system for voting collapses

explain