>>140564233 Hayek, Mises, Bohm-Bawerk, Friedman, Rand and even Rothbard supported open border. Even modern academic libertarians support open borders. It's only /pol/ tier teenage libertarians who are new to the ideology, against it.
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.
>>140557933 The American Libertarian party is a fucking sham. It's so frustrating to know that those fucking degenerates are the face of Libertarianism in this country. How in the fuck any American genuinely throw their lot in with these absolute dregs after watching their national convention is astounding.
>>140564731 >It's only /pol/ tier teenage libertarians who are new to the ideology The market is not an ideology. The market is a way of doing things. That's why it is so good: it happens regardless of your fancies.
Maybe I did not express myself correctly. Hoppe has read almost every one of those books, and thus is capable of giving a general praxeological-moral-ethical-philosophical-etc description of a free society. So if I had to choose one author, I'd read Hoppe. If I wanted to read a more thorough description of a certain institution from a libertarian POV, I'd read the other authors.
Now, related to the thread, I think that the question of open borders is answered beautifully by Hoppe. How open or closed the borders are will depend on the private, covenant-based community (since this is the most logical social organization for a free society).
Now, if we don't live in a free society, but instead we live in a minarchic nation, then the question would be (should be?) most likely answered by the population through vote. Cast a referendum. Setting the inherent problems of democracy aside, if the inhabitants of a nation choose their representatives, I think it makes sense they also chose their foreign policies.
>>140565531 Libertarianism is just a code word for market-based thinking. You don't have to depend on third-party "philosophers" to hold market ways in high regard. Yes, there are some constructs to be had, that's why you need the government to protect you from inflows of questionable human material. Ancaps have their own vision of this too.
>>140566109 My point is that natsocs are honest about their statism. Lolbertarians act like they value freedom, but consistently make nonarguments about how we need some kind of state to survive. Ive never met a libertarian that wasnt a fedora tipper or a "superior centrist" redditor. I have much more respect for the ones who can argue their points for their ideology.
>>140566080 No, libertarains and classical liberals (which preceded libertarians) were for open borders more or less. Libertarian closed borders is a /pol/ meme tacked on by teenagers who read just Hoppe
>>140557933 >When did Libertarians come to be in favor of open borders? Many libertarians such as myself don't share all the convictions the libertarian party has. I am against open borders, but I believe one should have the freedom to leave his country without the government's permission to do so.
>>140557933 Ever since the Koch Bros and their puppet Nicholas Sarwark decided to adopt the "liberaltarian" platform They decided it'd be more prudent to go soft-democrat and focus on bullshit like internet privacy and DUDE WEED and, yes, open borders. They're crypto commies, they divert attention from real issues and typecast libertarians as some "best of both worlds" bullshit instead of an axiomatically independent ideology. It makes me ANGRY!!!!!
>>140564731 Rothbard eventually opposed it and no one else you mention (notwithstanding Friedman but he shouldn't be lumped in) was in a position to understand immigration as a tool of the state as it has become. Hoppe has elucidated this subversive activity and now there is a significant faction at the Mises institute which opposes open borders *given the existence of a government* due to the political danger it poses to libertarian prospects.
>>140567636 >>140567770 I don't see what this has to do with anything. The question was when libertarians became in favor of open borders and that's the answer. That being said, Hoppe is against most libertarian theorists and I prefer to side with Hoppe. Minarchists aren't nearly as intellectually consistent and Hoppe's paleo slant is extremely compelling. The Cato Institute and the LP can take their holier than thou derision and go fuck themselves. They're sellouts compared the the Mises crowd and only ever-so-slightly more politically relevant
>>140569058 Okay now you're just lying. There are those in Block's camp who support it but Rothbard, Rockwell, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Tom Woods, and Jeff Deist have all stated that open borders, as it stands today, is nothing but a tool of the state to gobble up more power and generate more crises. Maybe you should do some more reading. Lay off the liberaltarians.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5 If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.