The Immigration Debate: Adam Kokesh vs Stefan Molyneux (Video)
What do you think about open or closed borders?
Get the MOST IMPORTANT BOOK EVER for FREE in every format including audiobook at http://thefreedomline.com/freedom Please support FREEDOM! by liking and sharing this video, subscribing, and sharing! Then for everything else: http://TheFreedomLine.com
This wasn't much of a debate. It was Moly steem-rolling Adam...
Thanks for saving 2 hours of my life.
How is that?
"When you're talking about third world cultures, you're talking about cultures that are almost uniformly and unbelievably brutal towards their children. I'm not just talking about female genital mutilation, or male genital mutilation, for that matter.
I'm talking about rape of children, sexual assault, sexual abuse of children, beatings, spankings, torture -- both mental and physical -- and so on. There are a lot of brutal cultures. The vast majority of cultures out there in the world are extraordinarily brutal towards their children.
And so, it's not just that there will be a bunch of people who will vote for the left and want bigger government and are dependent on the state. You are bringing a permanent or virtually permanent child-hostile set of cultures into the west. That is going to produce traumatized and brutalized adults who are going to be irrational, who are going to be hostile, who may be prone to violence.
This is just statistically the way it works out.
It's hard enough to get libertarians to give up spanking. Getting someone from Somalia to give up genital mutilation? Well, that is a task that is certainly beyond my abilities and, I suspect, yours as well."
Your response was a great big smile. I like you and all, but you are def a light weight compared to Molyneux. Moly contradicted you on numerous occasions or at least made you look like a hypocrite. The Brexit questioning was funny, thinking collectivism is universally bad(families are collectivist by nature), and constantly conflating nation with government. Open government boarders are preventing the defense of trespass but your position is don't violate the NAP regarding people who do not believe in the NAP. Government existing is the violation of the NAP the question is which is a larger violation open boarders or closed boarders? It is clear open borders is a much larger NAP violation. Not recognizing tax payers have the highest claim to stolen resources certainly not late comers. Not recognizing that in a private property society immigration would be much more strict as there would be many more boarders and non trespass would be enforced. Promoting Cloward and Piven strategy to overload tax payers while not paying taxes yourself(self admission that 3rd world immigrants are not adding value to the nation but a net negative economically). Not recognizing that if you import big government leftist who benefit from large government this will not lead to smaller government but it will lead to tribal civil war. The constant cultural relativism is nauseating. That shot at Molyneux at the end was pretty classless. Shitting on someone while they're respectfully trying to disengage and end the debate pretty weak, like I said over matched and outclassed.
The boarder debate over the past 18 months has exposed the leftist infiltration of libertarianism. Big government leftist are not going to transform into small government or no government people.
You are right, individualism never dies it infects others and spreads socialism.
https://steemit.com/anarchy/@digitalsecurity/counter-fiat-betting
What the hell are you talking about? The government steals your money and gives it to immigrants, not the immigrants come in and steal your money. Adam points this out multiple times in the debate.
And as Stef points out it doesn't matter. The government is preventing against the defense against trespass. Does a child of a bank robber get to keep the money their parents have stolen? That's a big fat, no.
Chase summarizes the debate well here:
https://radicalcapitalist.org/2018/01/07/post-debate-analysis-kokesh-vs-molyneux-on-immigration/
I am for OPEN BORDERS if people migrate under FREE MARKET conditions.
.jpg)
However the current MASS IMMIGRATION is STATE SPONSORED with HANDOUTS, and even a free ferry service!
In Europe, African and Middle Eastern migrants are being given homes for free and even pocket money on arrival, with taxpayers FORCED to foot the bill.
If an African migrant moves to Europe by buying an House I would fully support his right to move here. And migration from Africa would be very low under FREE MARKET conditions, as very few Africans would be able to afford an house in Europe.
To conclude: today's MASS IMMIGRATION has NOTHING TO DO WITH FREE MARKETS but it's a STATE TAX FUNDED initiative to flood Western Countries with Third World immigration for cheap labour but even to enact a criminal globalist plan called the Kalergi Plan which aims to erase "whiteness" to then create a new mulatto citizen of the World.
The current mass immigration from third world countries is Jewish Bolshevism Communism, the very opposite of free market!
Very sad many Libertarians are totally fine with their party endorsing anti-Sanctuary cities Republicans who want local police forced to enforce Federal immigration laws. Republicans who refused to take a stance on whether taxation is theft, or whether they support the drug war.
This same local LP affiliate choose not to even message it's members about your tour or share your events on its Facebook page, Adam. LP is a joke.
As Stefan keeps mentioning, they are siphoning money from the economy and from welfare programs. If that is the reason they are immigrating we should cut off welfare to them. If their reasons for immigration is work and they have no intentions on drawing public assistance then it is no one's business why they are here. If we shut off the welfare programs the leeches will quit coming over and the ones that do will be here for the right reasons.
We, as a nation, do not have an immigration problem. We have a welfare problem.
Exactly. Adam kept trying to say we need to focus on the government as the initiator of aggression in the case of increased welfare load, not the immigrants. That'd make sense if the immigrants were declining welfare (they aren't) or they didn't know where the money was coming from (they do). Stefan should have pushed that point harder rather than argue about other things for almost two hours.
What I think about this debate: https://steemit.com/dtube/@lasseehlers/htvlz1rf
Doesn't really seem sustainable though because you have to spread the idea of freedom. For every 1 mind you change to want smaller government 10 more come in that wants large government.
Open borders and freedom of movement!
#FREEDOM!
Yet somehow smaller states? How do you square the circle of smaller government without enforcing borders?
If California wants to secede, how's it gonna maintain it's new found independence from the rest of the states without border enforcement? And without border enforcement what does it even mean to be independent?
Did you watch the debate?
I listened to the audio, yes.
My understanding was that you admitted that small government is preferable to large government (your point about violently small vs mostly benign and large seemed pointless) yet how can one get a "small government" without defending the borders of that governmental region?
A local community does not need a government. We can all make decisions with a simple app and whoever doesn't agree will not be forced. Government is always the exercise of violence. Democracy is domination of majority. People living in communities of their choice have moral duty to stop any agression. In case of security from the outside, in a free market society, there will be many security providers to choose from. Some will specialize in borders. Peace
agreed. but until we get rid of welfare programs which steal money from productive people, this isn't an option. The way to make this an option is to stem the bleeding of wealth by stemming the immigration. Immigrants overwhelmingly draw on welfare money. Hence the need for closed borders while the welfare state is still in place.
Once the welfare state has been demolished - open the borders.
There is no other freedom like freedom and there is no government like no government :D
Yes, in the future.
Thank you so much for standing up for freedom! We don't need government officials throwing out peaceful people just because they were born on the wrong side of an imaginary line. If people have problems with taxes they should focus their anger on taxes and not on immigrants. We are a land full of different cultures and heritages and if I make this comment good enough I can buy slightly more bitcoin but I don't actually have anything of substance to add. Voluntary upvotes are way better than socialism at least.
Agree 100%!
I think we should try to picture a world with out borders! No more nations no more killing!
As an "American" who lives in Germany and has attended the mandatory integration course I have come to find that most of the immigrants from the third world countries are very open to the Freedom message. Most of them are less educated but are capable of learning and often speak several languages. Stefan seems to be basing his chosen position on very controversial statistics. Aside from that, he is not being principled by setting a bad example. I stand with you Adam, for freedom!