Direct Action for Open Borders

[YeahItsMeJP]

Yes, Jane. Whatever you say, Jane. Obviously if you said it, it MUST be true, Jane.

Right. Libertarians are socialists. That's why we support free-markets, are anti-tax, and support capitalism.

Yep, thems real socialists there.

Real socialists want the state to control the borders.

[error]

There's a subtle difference here that you're missing.

Socialists want open borders to help advance their globalist agenda. They want more people they can promise a free lunch to -- even though the vast majority of these immigrants come here to work and wouldn't otherwise care at all for socialism.

Libertarians want open borders because it's the right thing to do.

[Brock]

There's a subtle difference here that you're missing.

Socialists want open borders to help advance their globalist agenda. They want more people they can promise a free lunch to -- even though the vast majority of these immigrants come here to work and wouldn't otherwise care at all for socialism.

Libertarians want open borders because it's the right thing to do.

...and ANCAPs want it because a) armed gangs pretending to guard an imaginary line in the sand is just creepy and b) open borders are the fastest way to destroy the corporatist, welfare/warfare state.

[CNHT]

There's a subtle difference here that you're missing.

Socialists want open borders to help advance their globalist agenda. They want more people they can promise a free lunch to -- even though the vast majority of these immigrants come here to work and wouldn't otherwise care at all for socialism.

Libertarians want open borders because it's the right thing to do.

You don't stop A by advocating B. And they don't really care what the people do, they just want an excuse to merge governments and get rid of sovereignty so that the USA can be subject to their wacky laws.

[CNHT]

...and ANCAPs want it because a) armed gangs pretending to guard an imaginary line in the sand is just creepy and

Oh yah, scary.   

b) open borders are the fastest way to destroy the corporatist, welfare/warfare state.

It's just the opposite actually. It's the best way to destroy capitalism, which can only support people if most of them are working...not if 'equality' is being mandated by more taxation spread over the world.

Freedom isn't free -- it doesn't mean I can walk into your home and raid your fridge anytime I wish just because...

[KBCraig]

There's a subtle difference here that you're missing.

Socialists want open borders to help advance their globalist agenda. They want more people they can promise a free lunch to -- even though the vast majority of these immigrants come here to work and wouldn't otherwise care at all for socialism.

Libertarians want open borders because it's the right thing to do.

You don't stop A by advocating B. And they don't really care what the people do, they just want an excuse to merge governments and get rid of sovereignty so that the USA can be subject to their wacky laws.

In years past, you could drive into Canada while barely slowing down. You could walk back and forth between Juarez and El Paso, just by casually waving a driver's license and/or voter registration card. And you can drive right now from NH to VT, ME, or MA, without doing any of the above.

And in all of those cases, everyone crossing that line on the ground knows that they are subject to the laws there. Ease of travel does not reduce sovereignty one bit. When you drive into Canada, you better turn your headlights on. When you drive into VT, ME, or MA, you better have insurance and wear your seatbelt, and not possess any NH-purchased fireworks. Those other states' lack of liberty does not negate the liberty enjoyed in NH.

Kevin

[Lloyd Danforth]

Well said Kevin.

[forsytjr]

Do libertarians support the North American Union?  Do they support switching to the Amero (sp?) as a currency?

I like Ron Paul's approach (which was also advocated by Harry Brown) - get rid of entitltements/socialism, and you will reduce the demand for immigration.  I think to keep a socialist system, and open the borders opens us up to the globalist/socialist agenda.  I think you need to be careful about the order of operations - free America first, then open the borders, or open the borders first.  Socialist and libertarians may have different reasons for supporting open borders, but if you fail to defeat the socialists on everything else, and help them out with open borders, you have done them a great service.

[forsytjr]

I'm begging you guys to study up a bit on the North American Union before jumping on the open borders bandwagon. 

From Ron Paul : http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul341.html

Globalists and one-world promoters never seem to tire of coming up with ways to undermine the sovereignty of the United States. The most recent attempt comes in the form of the misnamed "Security and Prosperity Partnership Of North America (SPP)." In reality, this new "partnership" will likely make us far less secure and certainly less prosperous.

According to the US government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather, it is a "dialogue" launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005.

What is a "dialogue"? We don't know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a "dialogue" that many see as a plan for a North American union.

According to the SPP website, this "dialogue" will create new supra-national organizations to "coordinate" border security, health policy, economic and trade policy, and energy policy between the governments of Mexico, Canada, and the United States. As such, it is but an extension of NAFTA- and CAFTA-like agreements that have far less to do with the free movement of goods and services than they do with government coordination and management of international trade.

Critics of NAFTA and CAFTA warned at the time that the agreements were actually a move toward more government control over international trade and an eventual merging of North America into a border-free area. Proponents of these agreements dismissed this as preposterous and conspiratorial. Now we see that the criticisms appear to be justified.

Let's examine just a couple of the many troubling statements on the SPP's US government website:

"We affirm our commitment to strengthen regulatory cooperation...and to have our central regulatory agencies complete a trilateral regulatory cooperation framework by 2007"

Though the US administration insists that the SPP does not undermine US sovereignty, how else can one take statements like this? How can establishing a "trilateral regulatory cooperation" not undermine our national sovereignty?

The website also states SPP's goal to "mprove the health of our indigenous people through targeted bilateral and/or trilateral activities, including in health promotion, health education, disease prevention, and research." Who can read this and not see massive foreign aid transferred from the US taxpayer to foreign governments and well-connected private companies?

Also alarming are SPP pledges to "work towards the identification and adoption of best practices relating to the registration of medicinal products." That sounds like the much-criticized Codex Alimentarius, which seeks to radically limit Americans' health freedom.

Even more troubling are reports that under this new "partnership," a massive highway is being planned to stretch from Canada into Mexico, through the state of Texas. This is likely to cost the US taxpayer untold billions of dollars, will require eminent domain takings on an almost unimaginable scale, and will make the US more vulnerable to those who seek to enter our country to do us harm.

This all adds up to not only more and bigger government, but to the establishment of an unelected mega-government. As the SPP website itself admits, "The Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America represents a broad and ambitious agenda." I hope my colleagues in Congress and American citizens will join me in opposing any "broad and ambitious" effort to undermine the security and sovereignty of the United States.

[CNHT]

It always amazes me that people who are on the one hand, smart enough to see that created crises are what is used against us for the creation of more government controls cannot also see that open borders would be the 'final' created crisis in which chaos would reign and the government of the world would have a reason to swoop down on us in the worst most controlling way. This chaos could not be more welcomed by the UN who wants to number and control everyone and everything and who loves war and strife for just this reason.

Remember the quote by Rockefeller? "We just need the right crisis..."

Immigration should continue but declaring 'open borders' would result in the very chaos that the global socialist's dream of so they can have an excuse to institute the final solution.

So-called libertarians should stop taking this to the lowest common denominator just like the socialists do (mind control) by accusing people of not liking other kinds of people because it doesn't matter -- they could come from anywhere, not just 'brown' regions. it's not the people here that are in question, it's the policies of big government.

If you click on the sig line about the secessionism movement you will see that they are brainwashing kids in school to the UNs Agenda 21 plan or  'One World, One Globe' which is similiar to Hitler's "Ein Fuhrer, Ein Reich" philosophy.

"You will have one world government whether it is done by consent or by force...." another quote from the globalist Rockefeller.

Half of us may have to be forced but it seems the other half are simply giving consent because they are being made to feel guilty using the 'lowest common denominator' - race card.

[Dave Ridley]

ya i guess i will have to leave this one to the liberals and mecha types if there are any around here.

[KBCraig]

I'm begging you guys to study up a bit on the North American Union before jumping on the open borders bandwagon.

I have studied up on the NAU, and I agree that it is evil, and A Bad Thing. As would be the Amero.

While open borders are one of the things called for by the NAU, opening the borders is not the same thing as joining NAU.

[Raineyrocks]

ya i guess i will have to leave this one to the liberals and mecha types if there are any around here.

Thats a new word for me, what's a mecha type?

[Raineyrocks]

It always amazes me that people who are on the one hand, smart enough to see that created crises are what is used against us for the creation of more government controls cannot also see that open borders would be the 'final' created crisis in which chaos would reign and the government of the world would have a reason to swoop down on us in the worst most controlling way. This chaos could not be more welcomed by the UN who wants to number and control everyone and everything and who loves war and strife for just this reason.

Remember the quote by Rockefeller? "We just need the right crisis..."

Immigration should continue but declaring 'open borders' would result in the very chaos that the global socialist's dream of so they can have an excuse to institute the final solution.

So-called libertarians should stop taking this to the lowest common denominator just like the socialists do (mind control) by accusing people of not liking other kinds of people because it doesn't matter -- they could come from anywhere, not just 'brown' regions. it's not the people here that are in question, it's the policies of big government.

If you click on the sig line about the secessionism movement you will see that they are brainwashing kids in school to the UNs Agenda 21 plan or  'One World, One Globe' which is similiar to Hitler's "Ein Fuhrer, Ein Reich" philosophy.

"You will have one world government whether it is done by consent or by force...." another quote from the globalist Rockefeller.

Preach it sister!     I agree with you and BrokenWindow!

[CNHT]

ya i guess i will have to leave this one to the liberals and mecha types if there are any around here.

Thats a new word for me, what's a mecha type?

LaMecha and LaRaza are racist groups who vow to take over the land in the southwest from the USA. They often have large violent demonstrations where they openly show their hatred for 'white' America, vow to kill them, and burn American flags. They are shored up by the Maldef Society which is funded by the Rockefellers, the Ford Foundation, Bill Gates, and all the other global elitists and companies (I may not buy a new Toyota when it's time to get a truck because of this) who are working to bring about this borderless world society...in which they can control everyone and from which there will be no escaping to 'another' country.

Apologists will tell they are simply groups that are promoting the rights of indigent people, but they are really just the KKK in reverse.