pull down to refresh
156 sats \ 7 replies \ @DarthCoin 5 Oct \ on: What are your feelings on Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions of late? Politics_And_Law
My feelings? Borders are imaginary boundaries.
I think this is the wrong question.
The right question is about private property. If all those people coming from other places are invading your property you have the right to defend it. That's it.
What about the collective's private property? That's what nation states are meant to represent - a collection of individuals with common culture/ethnicity/heritage. And state lands are property of the collective and thus need to be protected from invaders. No?
reply
collective's private property?
there's no such thing. Or is communism. But that is another bullshit story.
And state lands are property of the collective and thus need to be protected from invaders.
If each one can defend their land/property where they live, why do you need state to "protect" you. That is an appeal to authority, that means you put yourself under their authority and you get what you fucking deserve - a boot on your face.
nation states are meant to represent
nation states are a scam to keep you enslaved by an illusion.
Watch and learn
reply
there's no such thing. Or is communism.
Sure there is, if you're part of a community and there's land/resource that doesn't belong to a particular individual but is shared by all members of the group. Take a park or a body of water (river, lake, sea) for example: if it has no legitimate claimant, no one can simply state "this belongs to me" - it needs to be collectively owned by the group who inhabit that territory. The issue is thay in most modern western countries the "community" as a cohesive homogenous unit has degraded. Most people have very few things in common with their neighbors in today's urban/suburban landscape which makes it practically impossible for a self governing group of a few thousand people at minimum to form. This creates a vacuum in which thugs in suits take power and make rules up for the common man (or at least attempt to). This isn't communism, but rather a hybrid model in which private and public/communal property can exist side by side.
If each one can defend their land/property where they live, why do you need state to "protect" you. That is an appeal to authority, that means you put yourself under their authority and you get what you fucking deserve - a boot on your face.
Easy there tiger. Again, I'm talking about a self organizing homogenous group of individuals who create a collective governing body to manage risks and issues that pertain to the group as a whole - a "community" or "commonwealth". So if a group of invaders trespasses on a certain individual's property it will be much easier and more efficient to protect himself by leveraging the power of the collective to resolve his issue. Reality and history show that individuals on their own cannot provide themselves security at scale...there's a reason humans have always organized into groups and created group governing structures. So forget about the state - you need to make a distinction between the modern nation state (which I also believe is a form of thuggery) and self organizing groups...
reply
There are no borders without government.
No law, no justice, or even framework for it.
Without government capital investment declines rapidly toward zero because there is no consistent way to enforce contracts and uphold property rights.
If you do not like government so much go somewhere there is none.
If on the other hand if you accept government is a fundamental requirement for prosperity and security get involved in working towards ensuring your government is not corrupt.
Libertarians complete disregard for governments and assertion that they are all completely corrupt and therefore there is no point in trying to change them is the greatest gift to all authoritarian despots as it grants them the perfect apathetic citizens who will not fight against corrupt government.
reply
I wonder how it would change US politics if the default was to side with citizens who enforced their own property rights.
We are very far away from this.
reply
Think about this: it's all a shitshow to keep more people divided and fight to each others.
Biden admin bring them inside and gave them perks to keep them coming.
Trump admin want to kick them out because is part of the initial plan (divide and control).
Both sides they don't give a shit about people and about you. They only want more power to keep the boot on your face.
Are among them criminals? Yes ofc, like everywhere else. But those criminals must be selected and bring to justice.
reply
Without government how do you select and bring to justice criminals?
Without government you cannot control immigration.
There are no borders without government.
No law, no justice, or even framework for it.
Without government capital investment declines rapidly toward zero because there is no consistent way to enforce contracts and uphold property rights.
If you do not like government so much go somewhere there is none.
If on the other hand if you accept government is a fundamental requirement for prosperity and security get involved in working towards ensuring your government is not corrupt.
Libertarians complete disregard for governments and assertion that they are all completely corrupt and therefore there is no point in trying to change them is the greatest gift to all authoritarian despots as it grants them the perfect apathetic citizens who will not fight against corrupt government.
reply