A Libertarian Case against Mass-Immigration

A Libertarian Case Against Mass Immigration
Keir Martland

Political Notes No. 197

ISSN 0267-7059 (print)
ISSN 2042-2776 (online)
ISBN: 9781856376594

An occasional publication of the Libertarian Alliance,
Suite 35, 2 Lansdowne Row, Mayfair, London W1J 6HL.

© 2013: Libertarian Alliance; Keir Martland

Keir Martland isPage Editor of The Libertarian (http://the-libertarian.co.uk). He was a member of the Conservative party for four years and Secretary of his local Conservative Future branch for nearly two before resigning. He defines himself as a paleolibertarian or a propertarian or Rothbardian/Hoppeian, and less and less as a classical liberal or libertarian due to the infiltration of the UK movement with Marxists.

The views expressed in this publication are those of its author, and not necessarily those of the Libertarian Alliance, its Committee, Advisory Council or subscribers.

FOR LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY

Government Property is an Oxymoron1

The consensus among modern libertarians seems to be that free immigration is the only libertarian stance possible in this debate because of the ‘economic benefits’ and that those who oppose free immigration are just statists who want the government to control who can and can’t move about from here to there.Conversely, it is my opinion that a state policy of open borders amounts to an infringement of property rights and that, consequently, border controls tighter than those currently in force are perfectly compatible with propertarianism, though certainly not compatible with the modern, vile, Marxist flavour of libertarianism to which many of us have become accustomed.

Talkin’-’bout my Generation

David Davis

In the late afternoons of our lives, various thoughts occur. I had a cyberchat with my colleague, the Dear Leader of the Libertarian Alliance, Dr Sean Gabb, at some indeterminate time overnight last night. We both agreed on some things:-

Everyone said “You can’t unseat the Political EnemyClass by voting them out. Well, I say: “it has never been tried before, and we shall have to see.”

David Davis

Clown or fruitcake?

(from Matt at the DT)

Today, for the first time a rather historically large number of British voters get to be able to elect, if they like, candidates for “Council Seats” (this to say in honest countries – “socialist Soviets”) from the United Kingdom Independence Party. Now, the Libertarian Alliance goes out of its way to be perennially nasty to all the parties extant in the UK, from time to time, and sometimes all at once. But it’s natural that a little more of our ire and frustration is reserved for those which are more truly socialist than others: for I at least can’t figure out how it might be possible to be what some people call themselves, which is “libertarian socialists” (yes I have heard that one) or even “left libertarians”, although that might just be possible.

This round of elections for regional soviets councils is notable for the frantic and public attempts by other parties, particularly the Tories, to make direct and sometimes ad-hominem attacks on the reputations and backgrounds of rather a lot of UKIP candidates. I’ve been watching British elections since 1959, more or less, and haven’t noticed any such thing on this scale ever before. If they occurred, such assaults tended to come from the socialist left.

The entire British political-class, ably egged on by the BBC, appears to have taken fright at the idea that, for once, letting people vote for who they’d like might actually change things, and not to that class’s liking. As I type, there are no results yet from vote-counting, but the morning may be interesting.

I want to continue by offering a libertarian-based policy position document for a party such as UKIP, were it to, let us say, win a majority in a regional soviet, or even a general election. But as rheumatoid arthritis is making my elbows increasingly non-functional tonight, typing is a little strenuous and exciting. So I’ll save that for a post in the next couple of days or so when the painkillers have kicked in.  Meanwhile, commenters might like to add their own suggestions.

 

(Incidentally, the headline owes a little credit to Air Marshall Arthur “Bomber” Harris”, who used a similar expression when someone suggested that “you can’t win a war by bombing the enemy alone”.)

You can no longer be sacked for your political beliefs

The recent case of Arthur Redfearn has proved to be of some significance in establishing a firmer basis for freedom of association within employment law.

Mr Redfearn, a bus driver, was considered a “first class employee” and had neither attracted complaints from his employers, West Yorkshire Transport Services (a subsidiary of Serco), nor from service users, during the short period of his employment. Not long after starting work with WYTS in December 2003, Mr Redfearn won a seat on Bradford Council representing the British National Party. He was featured in an article in the local newspaper and this prompted a trade union and other employees to make representations to WYTS. WYTS’s response to this pressure was summarily to dismiss Mr Redfearn on 30 June 2004. Because he had worked for them for six months only, which was less than the statutory minimum period, he was unable to bring a case for unfair dismissal against them. Instead, he was compelled to claim racial discrimination (on the basis that the BNP was, at the time of the case, a “whites-only organization”) – an ironic position given the BNP’s longstanding opposition to racial discrimination legislation.

Sean Gabb: Speech to Conservative “Future”

Text of a Speech to Conservative Future,
Given in The Old Star Public House, Westminster,
Monday the 16th February 2009
by Sean Gabb

I want to begin by praising your courage in having me here tonight to speak to you. I am the Director of an organisation that tried hard during the 1980s to take over the youth movement of the Conservative Party. The Libertarian Alliance provided a home and other support for Marc-Henri Glendenning, David Hoile and Douglas Smith, among others, when it looked as if libertarians might do the same to the Conservative Party as the Trotskyites nearly did to the Labour Party. Sadly, our efforts failed. Since then, the Conservative Party has become more watchful of people like us. It has also, I must say, made itself progressively less worth trying to take over.

The good is oft-interr-ed with their bones

David Davis

Since Margaret Thatcher is to be in-terr-ed tomorrow, I just thought we’d throw one last punch at her enemies and ours. I found this wonderful piece on The Last Ditch the other day, and one para deserves to be highlighted in our usual way:-

“If you want to know who freedom’s enemies are, mention her with approval. Mad eyes will light up all around you and foul sentiments will fill the air. Note their names and never leave them alone with anything you value; material, spiritual or ethical.”

Yes of course, I _know_ that we object to her having

(a) made the British State more efficient – as a recipe for disaster one would recommend this since the British-Political-Enemyclass is efficient already at making a powerful tyrannical state, and

(b) because she failed to absolutely destroy socialism at home and in the world, before members of that same EnemyClass destroyed her.

But I think that Tom Paine’s paragraph sums up who we are up against, whatever we as classical liberals think of Thatcher herself. I think we can lay her to rest now. May The Iron Lady Rust In Peace.

From Stiff Upper Lip to Wobbly Lower Lip in One Generation.

by Anna Raccoon
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AnnaRaccoon/~3/6EaoA0uVwQA/

Note: I thought, in 1997, we might just about survive another Labour Government. Then the Princess of Wales died, and I realised the country had gone barking mad. Is there any way back to nicely repressed normality? I doubt it. SIG

Jury Nullification: A Barrister Writes

by Howard R. Gray

Juries have a duty to try the case according to the law: this is trite. The judge is the tribunal of law, and the jury is the tribunal of fact: that is the simple rule of how criminal law works, and also just as trite. Judges in England are allowed broad scope to direct juries on the law and often put forward their views of the facts usually pre-seasoned with the exhortation that it is “up to you ladies and gentlemen of the jury” about any particular point they deem in need of comment.

That being said, there is a plethora of rules that they must use to put to a jury about particular points of law and about the standard of proof that must always be there in their directions. For example the “you must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt” and “satisfied so that you are sure”, then they go on to give examples. There are the Turnbull directions on corroboration of witness testimony and so on. Each factual element that has a contentious nature must be directed upon in the judge’s homily to the jury at the end of the trial. Failure to adequately direct a jury can result in the verdict being set aside on appeal. Jurors needn’t be too worried that justice will be denied; appeals are often successful.

Cameron gifts King James Bible to Pope Benedict

by Archbishop Cranmer
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2013/02/cameron-gifts-king-james-bible-to-pope.html

Note: I believe the Byzantine Emperor who dismissed Latin as a language of the barbarians was Nicephorus II Phocas, in one of his conversations with Liutprand of Cremona. Of course, I may be wrong. SIG

Why Import Evgeny Morozov When Tom Franks and Andy Keens are Out of Work??

by Kevin Carson
http://c4ss.org/content/17178
Why Import Evgeny Morozov When Tom Franks and Andy Keens are Out of Work??

Evgeny Morozov, in a recent review of Stephen Johnson’s “Future Perfect” (“Why Social Movements Should Ignore Social Media,” The New Republic, February 5), criticizes Johnson for a combination of “cyber-utopianism” and “Internet-centrism”:

I think we need to say things about these fellows

David Davis

https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/p480x480/554557_10151488913732518_711477817_n.jpg

The New Fourth Estate: Anonymous, Wikileaks, and –archy

http://c4ss.org/content/16677
The New Fourth Estate: Anonymous, Wikileaks, and –archy

“When people talk of the freedom of writing, speaking, or thinking, I cannot choose but laugh. No such thing ever existed. No such thing now exists; but I hope it will exist. But it must be hundreds of years after you and I shall write and speak no more.”

- John Adams

SUMMARY:

As government and industry collude, the interests of the powerful trample the rights of the multitude. Technology has granted invasive new eyes and ears to government agencies, spurning the right to privacy. Felicitously, the individual has also been empowered with two new tools to check the corporate state: hacktivism and leaks. The press has been captured by a handful of news corporations that are generally uncritical of government and fail to expose corporate injustice. The techno-libertarian culture has birthed the do-it-yourself fourth estate—usurping the illegitimate media and furnishing a viable alternative to the cartelized press. Two entities, Wikileaks and Anonymous, have emerged under this banner. This inquiry seeks to understand their history, methods, and to ascertain whether use of the discrete figurehead is efficacious.

Abusive Bailiffs: Old but Possibly Relevant Thoughts

That Sheep May Safely Graze
by Sean Gabb

This evening, the 26th September 2006, the BBC will broadcast its latest Whistleblower programme. This investigates the sharp and often illegal practices of court bailiffs. They are accused of tricking debtors—and frequently third parties —out of thousands of pounds that are not owed.

According to a report in The Daily Mail, the bailiffs in one firm are accused of:

• Doubling or tripling a judgment debt, and then appearing generous by deducting £100—and keeping the whole excess for themselves;
• Telling the relatives of debtors that they would have their own possessions seized;
• Threatening debtors with violence;
• Breaking and entering the premises of debtors and of third parties.

So far as they are true—and I have not seen the programme in question—these accusations show patterns of behaviour of which I was not previously aware.

The Frankfurt School: Conspiracy to Corrupt

http://www.catholicinsight.com/online/features/article_882.shtml

Note: Much good stuff here. As libertarians, of course, we are in favour of many of the “corruptions” listed – so far as they approved of them, the lefties weren’t all bad. Also, I don’t believe they were ever so well organised as is claimed. However, it’s an interesting read. SIG

Who Let the Dogs Out?

by Anna Raccoon
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AnnaRaccoon/~3/Sx_NV4FF02I/

Who Let the Dogs Out?

Cry havoc! and let slip the dogs of war,
that this foul deed shall smell above the earth with carrion men, groaning for burial.

William Shakespeare

I have been pondering this matter for days now, since before Christmas. Small details permeated my conscience, building up a picture that I could not bear to look at.

A news item, celebrating the inexorable rise of IVF births, how ‘wonderful’ it was that so many children should be created in a laboratory, by implication far from contact with nasty, smelly, dangerous, men. TV adverts that show smart, capable women leading imbecilic men by the hand to conclusions that would be obvious to any child. A Guardian article reviewing Steve Biddulph’s new book ‘Raising Girls’, which dealt exclusively with the need for girls to have ‘Aunts’, even pretend Aunties, as a ‘second person’ in their lives in whom they could confide – an article which managed to exclude all mention of men; ironic considering that Biddulph is justly famous for his book ‘Raising boys’ which championed the importance of men in their upbringing. A horrified quote from a former head-teacher that ’30 years ago it was considered ‘normal’ to involve parents in school outings, or for a child to see his head teacher alone in a room with a shut door – quelle horreur! Naturally they wouldn’t dream of doing such a thing today…Another newspaper report detailing how aggressively the rape laws are construed today. A newspaper report today, claiming that ‘One in Twenty women have been raped’ – the demonisation of men is almost complete. Surely the publication of the Yewtree report today, one of seven separate ’investigations’ – though I can scarcely credit an official record of ‘allegations’ as an ‘investigation’ – will complete the process.

Cultural Marxism Briefly Described

Via one of my FaceBook friends

Cultural Marxism is the primary strategy of the American and European Left.

Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci posited that what holds a society together are the pillars of its culture: the structures and institutions of education, family, law, media and religion, as they provide the social cohesion necessary to a healthy functional society. Transform the principles that these embody and… you can destroy the society they have shaped.

Gay Marriage, political correctness and Newspeak

by Robert Henderson
http://livinginamadhouse.wordpress.com/2012/12/16/gay-marriage-political-correctness-and-newspeak/

The commonly made objections to Gay Marriage are (a) marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman, a fact underpinned for many opponents by religious beliefs that only a man and a woman can be married, (b) claims that expansion of the definition of marriage to include same sex relationships will undermine the family and (c) such a novel status creates a legal anomaly whereby homosexual relationships become in some areas privileged over close non-sexual relationships between people of the same sex, for example, two elderly spinster sisters living together.

Minds Like A Sponge, So Get ‘Em Young

by Dick Puddlecote
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/DickPuddlecote/~3/q9TQOkLR_QI/minds-like-sponge-so-get-em-young.html

Minds Like A Sponge, So Get ‘Em Young After a few months respite, I was beginning to think that state educational silliness had been left behind now my two have left primary school. It has come thick and fast in the past couple of days, though.

‘Thackerism’™ and the ‘Long March’.

by Anna Raccoon
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AnnaRaccoon/~3/2WAQ7Hb2LcY/

‘Thackerism’™ and the ‘Long March’.

Rudi Dutschke coined the phrase ‘Der lange Marsch durch die Institutionen’ – ‘The Long Walk through the Institutions’ to describe his desired outcome of governmental institutions being infiltrated by those who shared his belief in Marxism and would be in a position to influence future generations; eventually you would end up with a society where all ‘thought’ was uniformly Marxist.

The “wrong” sort of indoctrination (for the left)

by Robert Henderson
http://livinginamadhouse.wordpress.com/2012/11/27/the-wrong-sort-of-indoctrination-for-the-left/

An unnamed (because they did not want the children identified) Rotherham couple experienced in fostering have had three of their charges peremptorily removed by Rotherham social services