/liberty/ - Liberty

I will bump this, lad

Capital Expansion in nations in which the Social-Democratic reforms of the Minimum wage and Employer liable work safety measures exists requires the importation of a reserve army of Labor willing to do the labor without the Social-Democratic benefits (AKA "They do the jobs *insert country's* citizens dont wish to") in order to maintain profitability

There are less than a million non-Chinese in China at any given time, even though the overall population is like five times that of the US. There are tons of migrants in western countries explicitly because traitors solicit for them

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/6418456/Labour-wanted-mass-immigration-to-make-UK-more-multicultural-says-former-adviser.html

and have actively pushed the overton window in such a direction to where discussion of immigration and immigrants involving anything other than glowing approval has become a major controversy and even a legal concern

What communon said is literally an inversion of the libertarian neophyte fallacy r.e. immigration the implication of both being that roofs were never built, lawns were left unattended and food was never processed before our brown skinned benefactors arrived in massive numbers.

>>95266

>There are tons of migrants in western countries explicitly because the traitors who oppose them have actively pushed the overton window in such a direction to where discussion of immigration and immigrants involving anything other than glowing approval has become a major controversy and even a legal concern

ftfy. if you weren't a pack of pathological nutters, you'd be less likely to poison everything you touch.

>>95268

Nice victim blaming faggot, next you’re going to tell me that we were asking for it because of how we were dressed. The absolute histrionic lunacy people are exposed to by both old media and social media has little basis in reality no matter what’s being covered

>>95282

Actually, yes, trying to victimize literally everyone you can get your hands on is a large part of how you managed to alienate, well, basically everyone.

>>95310

Until you’re prepared to make an actual argument and clarify what you’re even talking about with something other than vague buzzwords don’t ever post in me or my son’s thread(s) again, retard.

>>95163

Borders beyond those of private property are incompatible with both anarchism and capitalism. The proper way to limit immigration in ancapistan is to refuse to do business with immigrants. If enough people agree with you that immigrants don't belong here, they will find themselves with nowhere to live and nothing to eat. If few people agree with you, your claim that no one wants to live around immigrants is exposed as falsehood, and you will find yourself at a disadvantage to competitors that will do business with anybody.

>>95340

> The proper way to limit immigration in ancapistan is to refuse to do business with immigrants.

Yes, but when the Civil Rights Act and similar legislation prevent you from doing that you are forced to exercise your freedom of dissociation through other means. On top of that, most of these immigrants end up on welfare, and I would prefer that the 40% of my income that gets stolen every year go towards something other than welfare for outsiders. These immigrants also vote left by a significant margin, which means their coming into the country will cause more of my income to be stolen in the future, and more of it to be used in favor of welfare and other such nonsense.

>inb4 then you should try to repeal the civil rights act and the welfare state

The chances of doing that in CY+3 are near zero. The chances of doing that in CY+4 after more illegals start voting, and shift discourse even further left, is even smaller. The chances of immigration being somehow limited are somewhat higher, making supporting restrictive immigration the only viable policy, even if it is highly imperfect and solves nothing in the long run.

>>95343

So the problem is with the Civil Rights Act and not with open borders. You should be drawing attention to the ways in which existing laws hurt everyone, even those they're intended to protect, rather than making unprincipled demands for greater government intervention. When you argue for closed borders, you're outing yourself as a bigot (a term I am using without making moral judgements), which makes people write off your arguments as merely justification for your feelings. What you should be arguing for instead is to give Americans the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is and show how they truly feel about equality.

>>95345

>So the problem is with the Civil Rights Act and not with open borders.

See the second part of my post.

>You should be drawing attention to the ways in which existing laws hurt everyone

That happens outside the ballot box. Spreading awareness and all that shit for educating that small subset of people that are receptive to your ideas. The ballot box is for delaying the collapse of the country's a little bit longer to give us time to implement alternative contingencies. Therefore the ballot box is to be used to punish the left, and to keep them out of power by any means necessary. The left uses immigrants to expand their voter base and get more leftists into power, so they have to go back.

>people write off your arguments as merely justification for your feelings

Feels>reals in a democracy, nearly every other voter is just justifying his feelings, they're not going to write off shit.

>What you should be arguing for instead is to give Americans the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is and show how they truly feel about equality.

Don't be naive. People aren't going to put their money where there mouth is, the whole appeal of democracy is that you get to spend other people's money.

>>95356

>Freedom is hard, so I guess I'll just become a statist and contribute to my own oppression

Have you considered suicide?

>>95345

>out yourself as a bigot

No, you out yourself as a pragmatist as opposed to an ideologue

>>95383

What was I supposed to take away from that video? It's completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I never argued that we should allow immigration so that poor people can come to the US and not be poor. I pointed out that it is unethical to demand greater government intervention, irrational to reject immigrants that are the cream of the Mexican crop (which is a claim made in the video that you just posted), and suboptimal to refuse someone's business solely because of their birthplace or skin color.