Globalist traitors want to give millions of anti-American foreigners US citizenship, jobs, and benef

Originally posted by DINSTAAR

Governments have a monopoly of the legitimate use of violence and coercion.

Not everywhere, have you read the Second Amendment?

It's practical goal in society is to keep people safe (stop violence) and maintain order (through violence). To think that creating a system of violence to stop violence, is irrational. This makes all kinds of no sense.

So what is your "rational" alternative?

Originally posted by aorAki
The fact is that the U.S.A. has sold itself as a beacon of liberty and freedom

I guess you missed that part about "Liberty Enlightening the World", the idea Bartholdi had behind the statue was other countries (like France) emulate the US and have more freedom, not foreigners come to the US to have more freedom. Any other meaning is a corruption that has been tacked on by narrow special interest groups.

What's this I hear about consumption, obesity and greed? Maybe taking in immigrants will give a new lease of life to the 'Fat Yank'?

Not hardly, most illegal aliens and legal immigrants to the US are Mexicans, and they are the second most obese people in the world, right after the "Fat Yank".

How dare we try to help people!

Again, the idea is to give them freedom in their own countries so they can help themselves. Like the 1.2 billion Chinese who now have a life many times better than before, because Americans and other nations led by Ronald Reagan defeated global Communism. The Allies did the same for Germany and Japan. Are you getting the picture yet?

For too long have people been mistrusting and intolerant of foreigners/outsiders/auslanders (Ich bin ein auslander?) and focussed more on the differences than the similarities.

The US allows in 1.2 million legal immigrants every year, more than the rest of the world combined. How many does New Zealand allow in? I know they won't let me in.

I know that my life has certainly been enriched by contact with people outside my safe little sphere of influence.

If that "contact" included you paying for over half of their housing, health care, education, and food, and having to learn their language to get a job, would you feel the same way? That's how it is for many Americans in California.

reply to post by aorAki


Tolerance of what? People have the right not to like someone for whatever reason they choose.

Thats a little thing called freedom.

You can feel your life has been enriched by immigrants as much as you want, but you certainly cant expect everyone to feel the same way you do.

reply to post by TimBrummer

Not everywhere, have you read the Second Amendment?

When Uncle Sam has cruise missiles, thermonuclear bombs, aircraft carriers, and tanks I think its time to stop thinking that the second amendment can actually protect us. It would be like a Red Dawn scenario, except the invaders wouldn't fall from the sky but rather drive up in US Gov vehicles.

Plus, they have the monopoly of the legitimate use of force. They can bust down your door, kill your dog, and shoot you because you happened to be cleaning your weapons at the time, all the while with impunity. All because your neighbor ratted you out because they found a joint near your garage door.

The second amendment means nothing because the constitution means nothing. The government will only follow that document when it is convenient and when the 2nd amendment is inconvenient, it will be taken away or ignored like it has been.

So what is your "rational" alternative?

Voluntary associations. Think of it in terms of dating. If I was forced to date only certain people that were designated to me, would that be fair for either party. And to take that a step further it gets a little rapey.

Don't take what isn't yours
Don't hurt other people
Don't force services from people

All I want is for common ethics used in personal relationships to be extended to groups of people.

For some reason, when you put a label like 'American' on a bunch of people, it is ethical to communally behave in way that is morally reprehensible. Government Euphamisms are changing the way we think about terrible acts we commit.

Seriously, government programs have to go through an Orwellian translator for us to go along with them. QEII should be called what it actually is.... debasing the currency.

Voluntary exchanges is all I ask for and I can't tell you exactly how it is going to work, but that is the point. No one knows how anything is going to work. Government officials say they know how stuff is going to work out and try to plan accordingly, but are always wrong. That very planning is what takes our freedom and earnings away. Planning the future is like trying to explain Twitter to a cave man. Good luck with that.

Originally posted by DINSTAAR

Don't take what isn't yours
Don't hurt other people

Have you heard of the Los Zetas drug gang in Mexico? They are better armed than the Mexican army. How would you stop a violent, immoral, unethical "voluntary association" like that from taking everything from you and me?

reply to post by TimBrummer

Again, the idea is to give them freedom in their own countries so they can help themselves.

I wonder what the world would look like now if our ancestors thought the same as you.

This statement is absolutely insane. First, no one gives anyone freedom.... they can choose not to take it. Second, most Americans are here because they did the opposite of what you said. Third, America is not like a clubhouse where you can shut the door behind you. You made it here. Put yourself in their shoes. If you can't feed your family, as a father, wouldn't it be imparitive for you to change that... Move away from the drug cartels and the oligopoly that exists in Mexico seek freedom in the place many before you have.

100 years ago, people were whining about the Italians and the Irish. The fact is, if they don't steal or hurt others, they have as much of a claim to America as you do.

Like the 1.2 billion Chinese who now have a life many times better than before, because Americans and other nations led by Ronald Reagan defeated global Communism.

This is false. The only thing the US had to do to start trading with China is to stop preventing it. Also, China failed a lot of experiments. They were well on their way to emulating Hong Kong policies before Reagan did his photo op.

Global communism defeated itself, as will global democracy.

If that "contact" included you paying for over half of their housing, health care, education, and food, and having to learn their language to get a job, would you feel the same way? That's how it is for many Americans in California.

Sounds like you have a problem with your American government. Those immigrants had nothing to do with what your government did. I would suggest that the anti-immigration sentiment turn into an anti-government intrusion sentiment.... those immigrants (illegal or not) did nothing to you.

Have you heard of the Los Zetas drug gang in Mexico? They are better armed than the Mexican army. How would you stop a violent, immoral, unethical "voluntary association" like that from taking everything from you and me?

This brings me to another good point. I came across this t-shirt a few years back that made the most sense.
"If you think the problems government creates are bad, just wait until you see the solutions"

That problem you talk about was caused by your government. When is the last time you went to a book store with 50 armed-to-the-teeth guards in it? Never.... because books are legal. The reason the drug cartels use violence is because civil discourse is not an option for an illegitimate business.

Plus, self defense is not immoral. Associations being voluntary does not even mean that a military could not exist. At a time when people need to be defended, I am sure you can find enough people to donate funds and guns etc to wage a war. In fact, if you had a militia civil defense system in place, you could easily resist a drug gang. Just because a government provides a service now, does not mean it can't exist without one.

Even if you transplanted a group like that into a universe with voluntary exchanges, they would have no one to fight, no reason to fight, and nothing to gain because they want to sell drugs.

Originally posted by DINSTAAR
This statement is absolutely insane. First, no one gives anyone freedom.... they can choose not to take it.

My brother-in-law who was in a Communist forced labor camp for 10 years disagrees with you.
What about you, you want complete freedom from government, have you taken it?

Third, America is not like a clubhouse where you can shut the door behind you.

Actually it is, and we can, and you really hate that don't you.

Sounds like you have a problem with your American government. Those immigrants had nothing to do with what your government did. I would suggest that the anti-immigration sentiment turn into an anti-government intrusion sentiment.... those immigrants (illegal or not) did nothing to you.

So you are not American? Well then you have no standing to participate in this matter, and I have nothing else to say to you.

reply to post by TimBrummer


i refuse to believe that the problem is FUBAR. Our government needs to step up and do something about the illegal immigrant situation asap. work on a solution and put it through. first question i would ask all illegal aliens regardless of country of origin....What are you currently doing to become a legal citizen? have you done research on what it takes to become legal? are you saving money to take care of it, have you filled out any paperwork, taken any ESL classes etc etc.

reply to post by TimBrummer

My brother-in-law who was in a Communist forced labor camp for 10 years disagrees with you.

This seems to be a misunderstanding. I am not saying freedom must be taken. I am saying that one is born free and then some government swoops in and makes people subjects. If a government is does not take away freedom, freedom exists.

Actually it is, and we can, and you really hate that don't you.

If thats the hypocracy you want to believe... whatever. Seriously. I doubt your ancestors were here originially.

So you are not American? Well then you have no standing to participate in this matter, and I have nothing else to say to you.

I live in America. I have served in the American military. I refuse to give the American government any legitimacy by approving anything it does. Do not exclude my opinions on the basis that I don't accept this fake empire as the master of my world. This is the opposite of discourse.

"If you dont like America, you can get out"... is a euphamism for "I'm dumb. Real dumb. I know I can't win this argument..... so...... leave before I have to change."

reply to post by DINSTAAR

Sounds like you have a problem with your American government. Those immigrants had nothing to do with what your government did. I would suggest that the anti-immigration sentiment turn into an anti-government intrusion sentiment.... those immigrants (illegal or not) did nothing to you.

If I am reading this right, your solution to the problem is
1. discontinue all forms of government benefits and welfare programs (even in economic crisis), thus millions of people in America would fall into poverty.
2. On top of it, allow unregulated immigration, so another millions of poor and uneducated people would come into America

I would call it "Instant third world country. Just add water!"

reply to post by DINSTAAR

I am not saying freedom must be taken. I am saying that one is born free and then some government swoops in and makes people subjects. If a government is does not take away freedom, freedom exists.

What makes you believe that in the absence of government, another entity, perhaps even more vile and controlled by less people (gang, corporation) wont take away ones freedom?

A gilded cage is still a cage.

Americans are slaves, althought most don't even know it.

This sort of "Nightmare Act" is ridiculous - no other nation on the planet would even consider such a stupid move.

originally posted by: aorAki


"Give me your tired, your hungry and your poor"....

I guess the statue of Liberty really should be called the statue of bigotry now. (thanks to Lou Reed).

Do you want Isolationism, or to be part of a global community?
Nationhood is so passe these days and is a construct that breeds intolerance.

Well played.

The Statue had nothing to do with immigration. It was about freedom. The French honored us with the Statue to celebrate the friendship between our countries. We were the first nation ever to make the rulers of their country aware that freedom and liberty was possible. The sonnet, "The New Colossus", engraved at the base, was written by the Jewish poet Emma Lazarus as part of a fund raising campaign. She wrote as a way of honoring those Jews suffering from anti-semitism who wanted to flee from their host countries. The original manuscript is held by the American Jewish Historical Society. The sonnet played no significant part in the celebration of the opening of the statue in 1883 and was all but forgotten. 20 years later the text of the poem was put on the inner wall of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty. And that's how the poem ended up on a Statue that was specifically created to honor freedom and originally inscribed only with the adoption date of the Declaration of Independence (JULY IV MDCCLXXVI). And that's why we call it the Statue of Liberty and not the Statue of Immigration.

Today the true story of the Statue of Liberty is disingenuously used by people like you for political purposes to paint a gauzy picture of those happy times when we weren't so picky about who was allowed to immigrate to our country. In fact it was just the opposite, the US had (like the rest of the world had, and still has) a merit based immigration policy. Potential immigrants had to stop on the island and pass a rigorous inspection before being allowed to set foot on the mainland. If you didn't have enough money with you, if you had no job skills, or if you had a criminal record, you were rejected. If you passed that phase you were sent to the medical inspection line and uniformed military surgeons quickly culled out those with minor medical conditions. Even a case of glaucoma could cause you to be rejected. The doctors would observe the immigrants as they climbed the stairs leaving the baggage area. If you had difficulty with those stairs, that could cause you to be rejected. Ellis Island was sometimes known as "The Island of Tears" or "Heartbreak Island" because of the immigrants that were turned away.

@RKWWWW