Bad DREAM: Immigration “Reform” is an Unworthy and Unrealistic Goal


by Thomas Knapp
http://c4ss.org/content/16225

Note: Abolition of the State might easily reduce the amount of immigration into a territory. SIG

Bad DREAM: Immigration “Reform” is an Unworthy and Unrealistic Goal

When uniformed thugs from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement raided Erika Andiola’s home and abducted her mother and brother, the first media notes on the event identified Andiola as a prominent “immigration reform” activist and suggested petitioning prominent kingpins in the government immigration and “homeland security” racket for their release.

While I sympathize with Andiola’s specific predicament, I’m saddened to see her wasting her time agitating for political band-aids like the DREAM Act, which is just another regulatory scheme cobbled together by politicians. It’s no different in principle than the Arizona-specific legislation which singled her out for college scholarship ineligibility and then made her unemployable as an “illegal immigrant.”

At first glance, the DREAM Act looks like an improvement on the current repressive immigration regimes of both the federal government and those of several states like Arizona. It supposedly exempts immigrants who arrived in the US as minors (Andiola came to America at the age of 11), from ICE’s reign of terror if they jump through various political hoops such as service in the US military and/or enrollment in and graduation from government-approved indoctrina … er, “higher education” … programs.

But there are several major problems with the DREAM Act.

The first is that, as described above, it’s a nasty piece of extortion from top to bottom. Immigrants should not, any more than people born inside the imaginary lines (“borders”) drawn by our dominant street gang, be required to render service to that gang in return for being left alone.

The second is that the politicians who draft, and the goons who enforce, state regulatory schemes can’t be trusted to go by their own rules in any case. If they could, this wouldn’t even be an issue, seeing as how the US Constitution specifically and indisputably forbids the federal government to involve itself in immigration at all, apart from levying a maximum ten dollar tax on each immigrant. By what logic would we expect ICE to abide by subordinate rules like the DREAM Act when its very existence is a violation of “the Supreme Law of the Land?”

While it’s possible that the several states would develop similarly stump-stupid immigration rules if left to do so as the US Constitution requires, chances are that at least some of them would compete to entice immigrants rather than terrorize them with onerous impositions like Arizona’s SB 1070, which was sold as an “enforcement” hook for those federal rules (I’ve personally dubbed it “the Know-Nothing Appeasement Act”).

But even devolution to the state level is insufficient to guarantee the rights of America’s immigrants. The only real solution, as with every other social problem, is to abolition of the state itself.

Shiny badges and expensive offices notwithstanding, ICE is no less a criminal enterprise than Los Zetas or the Gambino family, and its abduction of Andiola’s family no less a crime. It’s time to recognize that and respond accordingly. “Reform” of the existing system through the DREAM Act or other political legerdemain would be meaningless window-dressing.

flattr this!

About these ads

20 responses to “Bad DREAM: Immigration “Reform” is an Unworthy and Unrealistic Goal

  1. In a libertarian society there would be no right to enter private property (apart from in certain special circumstances – for example someone buys land in a circle round you, there must be a right of “exit”),

    And, in a libertarian society, the vast majority (if not all) land would be privately owned.

    So who was allowed to “immigrate” to it would be up to the private owner (an individual or a private organsation – such as a Church).

    In the United States (according the Consitution) the Federal government is only supposed to own the capital (ten miles square I believe) and military bases (forts, weapon stores….).

    Yet, somehow, it has declared itself the owner of a third of the country.

    And even in what is still, supposedly, private property – the government declares that land owners may not use force to defend their property against INVADERS.

    This makes a mockery of the government claims to be opposed to illegal immigration – it will actually send a private property owner to prison for the “crime” of defending their own property.

    Nor does it stop there………

    In 1982 the Supreme Court ruled that the taxpayers of Texas must pay to educated the children of illegal immigrants (who had been born outside the United States).

    This was clearly “taxation without representation”.

    Whatever one thinks of “representative democracy” – taxation by a group of unelected judges is even worse.

    And it did not stop there.

    A few years later there was propaganda campaign in the “mainstream” media.

    Supposedly private hospitals were throwing out pregant women – in order to avoid the cost of helping them give birth.

    This propaganda campaign was, mostly, a pack of lies – but Congress (as normal) was fooled.

    A Statute was passed and (again as normal in modern times) the members of Congress did not read what they were voting on (which does raise some doubts about “representative democracy”).

    So the E.R. Act was born.

    A de facto right to automatic “Emergency” care at supposedly privately owned hospitals.

    Soon virtually any care was declared “Emergency” and the bills passed on to the poor saps who continued to buy health insurance (no surprise that this helped explode the price of health insurance).

    And, of course, the free ER care applied to illegal immigrants.

    So – any resistance to the invasion of private farms and ranches, banned.

    “Free” education for the kiddies.

    “Free” heath care.

    And lots and lots of other welfare goodies also……

    And even the vote.

    You see in many States there is a “motor voter law” (thanks to a certain Senator by the name of Barack Obama) if you have a driver’s license you can vote.

    And it is fairly easy (in many States) for an illegal to get a driving license……

    So when the government comes up with a plan for “immigation reform” the logical response would be.

    “Just stop the things you are already doing – stop preventing people defending their own private property (their ranch, their farm, their…..), stop the “free” education, and the “free” health care, and all the other welfare and…….”

    If the govenrment just did NOTHING the problem would not really be a problem.

  2. Julie near Chicago

    The Federal Government has also arrogated to itself the right to tell you what you can and can’t do in the way of altering your property, such as building a house there. The EPA can step in at its whim and allow as how you’re “destroying a wetland” or some d*** thing, and you’re charged some enormous daily fine until you return the property to its pristine condition as of before the Indians walked down from Russia.

    Effectively, there is no such thing as private property in land in America.

  3. Voldemort au Vent

    And the wind it bloweth every day. When will that wind blow away?

    When the windbag next witters about his “libertarianism”, remember how quickly he resorted to hysterical abuse of someone who (as a nazi) believes in free speech, free enquiry and the decriminalization of all drugs. If Mr Marks got his hands on power, how long do you think people who disagreed with him would last?

    Read on for the answer to that:

    “It would, of course, be emotionally satisfying to cut Kevin Carson’s Black Flagger (Black Flaggers like Carson will side with the Red Flagger Marxists – indeed they already are and have for years) throat, or blow his head off with a bullet (although he would be more likely to do those things to me) – but it is the job of politics to AVOID THAT SITUATION.”
    (https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/libertarian-self-marginalization/#comment-48626)

    The comment, I think all will agree, shows a most alarming degeneracy of character. I am shocked. It is not the job of politics to keep us from cutting the throats of those with whom we disagree. No one of good character is tempted even to fantasise about such things. The next time Paul boasts of his conversion to Christianity, or of his instinctive cultural conservatism, or in general of his spotless moral purity, I for one will remember the malevolent and dangerous beast I have seen behind the smiling mask.

    https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/paul-marks-condemnation-and-disclaimer/

  4. Learn to read scumbag.

    I said that the purpose of politics (and so on) is to AVOID THAT SITUATION. To AVOID combat.

    I even put it in capital letters and you still do not understand.

    Truly you Nazi types are dumb.

  5. By the way – the person hiding behind the false name above is indeed a Nazi, see his comments on the Swiss-ladies-on-bikes thread.

  6. By the way – what “conversion” to Christianity – I have always been a Christian. That does not mean I am a pacifist – and I have never claimed to be a pacifist.

    I have never claimed not to be a human being either – with all the instincts (bad as well as good) that humans have. Civlilisation (civil society) does not depend on a country being inhabited by angels – it is exactly because we are NOT angels that we need civil society (the web of voluntary interactions between human beings), that is what I explained – at some length. In the bit that Mr Hitler Lover takes OUT OF CONTEXT.

    Julie’s comment…

    Agreed.

    Private property owners should be allowed to decide who comes on their property.

    And (of course) the government should not subsidize people – or rather force TAXPAYERS to subsidise them.

    Follow those two rules – and a lot of this “immigration problem” just is not a problem any more.

  7. Of course some serious points raised, but I have been doing some deeper research into immigration from various sources, firstly the high crime rates of immigrants comming into the counrty are fast erroding the cuts to the buget, we are seeing huge numbers of cases every week were immigrants are committing serious cases such as murder, the cost today stands at £49,000 per year to incarcerate immigrant criminals, all the cuts being proposed
    on OAP’s will be gobbled up in no time with the multimillion pound increasing prison buget, with many people getting life or ten years the
    economy will not be able to sustain it, the response of the government is
    to initiate a new super prisons programe, prisons that can hold thousands
    of prisonsers, like small towns, serious crime rates committed
    by migrants such as murder, robbery, rape, violence, is extremely high, with
    hudge numbers of muslims being detained to the point where prison gymnasiums are being turned into mosques, when the true financial figures
    are released this year they are predicted to look very grim, and add some
    weight to arguments welfare cuts are being spent on immigration issues, I intend to do
    some more fact finding in the new year to expose the true facts.

  8. Of course one interesting point home office data, recently disclosed in one prison a third of the population was muslim, not including the other ethnic minorites, a conservative estimate predicts in just ten years the population of some prisons will exceed 50% immigrant population, with little or no money to pay for it, the governments prison policy is totally de-facto!

  9. If we consider this recently obtained some government figures from the
    F.O.I. the cost of sending a migrant to prison for seven years stands at
    a total sum of £343,000 not including inflation, this does not include the
    wealfare bill for his family if he were in employment which can exceed
    £140,000. Not including inflation.

  10. But what about those who do not get sent to prison, example of some recent court cases, drunk stealing banana from restaurant fridge, court costs to tax payer £22,000, theif stealing newspapers £4,000, theif stealing two pints of milk, £950.00, legal costs minor none custodial sentences, lawyers love it!

  11. Voldemort, I think you may have missperceived a democratic debate on
    this issue, obviously many people use the nazi argument agianst people
    during debate, but really voldemort you comments are completely
    out of context. find no evidence of anyone being a nazi in the context
    of the articles. God loves all!

  12. Voldemort au Vent

    By the way – the person hiding behind the false name above is indeed a Nazi, see his comments on the Swiss-ladies-on-bikes thread.

    Indeed, please see them:

    https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/02/swiss-girls-on-bicycles/

    The great (and Jewish) psychologist Hans Eysenck got into a great deal of trouble for pointing out how psychologically similar nazis and communists were. But one difference, he said, was that nazis actually liked violence and fantasizing about it; communists saw it more as a means to an end. Which side does Paul more resemble, I wonder?

    “It would, of course, be emotionally satisfying to cut Kevin Carson’s Black Flagger (Black Flaggers like Carson will side with the Red Flagger Marxists – indeed they already are and have for years) throat, or blow his head off with a bullet (although he would be more likely to do those things to me) – but it is the job of politics to AVOID THAT SITUATION.”
    (https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/libertarian-self-marginalization/#comment-48626)

  13. Dear Mr Fake Name.

    Learn to read.

    Specifically what the words “AVOID THAT SITUATION” mean.

    Of course I despise Black Flag types – whether Fascists (like yourself) or anti large scale private property “anarchists”, by the way I hold that the Black Flag “anarchists” (as opposed to real anarchocapitlaists) simply rename the state “the people” – a distinction without a difference.

    However, I doubt I would like to kill you as much as you obviously would like to kill me (after all I do not start these exchanges – so your desire to do me harm is clearly greater than my desire to do you harm), however I am not going to pretend that I would burst into tears if you fell into one of your own gas chambers (or whatever). But the whole point of libertarian non aggression principle (indeed of society generally) is to AVOID THAT SITUATION, to AVOID combat.

    As for combat – my father faught both the Communists (who he knew well – having been one in his youth) and the Nazis (people such as yourself). And he certainly did not go around attacking black people under a false name (as you do – on the other thread). If I had a problem with someone – black, white, or green with pink spots, he said so openly.

    I have tried to follow my father’s example on the point of being open and honest. You would do well to do the same. Men have “hair growing on their faces” (of course we are violent creatures), but men can also “shave off the hair each day” – accept the violence in ourselves and live by rules that control it, that submit it to the law of JUSTICE i.e. the nonaggression principle (private property rights).

    I have no objection at all to you living on a private estate – from which all people of “tainted blood” (including myself) would be excluded.

    Indeed I oppose banning “covenants” designed to keep people, such as myself, from certain areas of housing.

    And I also oppose banning the practice of private property owners being allowed to keep people such as myself out of hotels (on the grounds of “tainted blood” or whatever) – something that was done (in even in New York City) as late as the 1940s.

    I also oppose the restrictions on freedom of speech and private property rights contained in the British Acts of Parliament of 1965, 1968, 1976, and 2010.

    And, unlike you, I oppose restrictions on freedom of speech and so on – UNDER MY OWN NAME.

    If you are truly the great Ayrian warrior (who is going to exterminate people of “inferior blood” such as myself) why are you so desperate to hide?

    Have a nice day.

    Yours SIncerely.

    Paul Marks.

  14. Voldemort au Vent

    Many things are plainly quite beyond the grasp of Paul’s decidedly peculiar mind. Amongst them is the concept: “When you’re in a hole, stop digging.”

    However, I doubt I would like to kill you as much as you obviously would like to kill me…

    Well, some things are obvious in our exchange, Paul, but that isn’t amongst them. I assure you, neither I nor Sean Gabb, the genuine libertarian whom you, the not-libertarian-at-all, have accused of being a nazi sympathizer, harbours the slightest desire to cause you any harm at all. You are projecting your own malignant, malevolent, and murderous psychology onto others, Paul.

    That quote of yours really is a gift that keeps giving. Let’s engage issues around it once more:

    “It would, of course, be emotionally satisfying to cut Kevin Carson’s Black Flagger (Black Flaggers like Carson will side with the Red Flagger Marxists – indeed they already are and have for years) throat, or blow his head off with a bullet (although he would be more likely to do those things to me) – but it is the job of politics to AVOID THAT SITUATION.”
    (https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/libertarian-self-marginalization/#comment-48626)

    Now, we’re all familiar (of course) with the concept of psychopathy, but I believe Paul has opened a new category in the annals of morbid psychology: that of projective psychopathy, whereby the psychopath believes his own malevolent impulses are generally or even universally shared. He doesn’t merely believe that cutting throats and blowing people’s heads off would be “emotionally satisfying”: he believes that this is self-evidently so. Again, Paul, I assure you: neither I nor Sean Gabb nor any reasonably normal human being derives emotional satisfaction from even contemplating such things.

    I have tried to follow my father’s example on the point of being open and honest.

    Yes, Bluebeard opens the door of his chamber, invites everyone to look inside, then proclaims his superior ethics on the ground that he is being “open and honest”. Let’s engage issues around the concept of chutzpah:

    Rosten also defined the term as “that quality enshrined in a man who, having killed his mother and father, throws himself on the mercy of the court because he is an orphan.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chutzpah

    It is also the quality enshrined in a man who proclaims himself a libertarian and believer in free speech, tells us it would be emotionally satisfying to cut the throat of or blow the head off an ideological opponent, then announces his moral superiority on the ground that he is being “open and honest”. Yes, Paul, you’re being open and honest about being a non-libertarian with psychopathic tendencies. Feel free to carry on.

    • Voldemort – I think PM’s problem is that he isn’t all there. For example, he’s spent two years accusing Kevin Carson of inciting the Egyptian mob to violence, when no one familiar with the English language could fail to see that the sentence “Let the looting begin” refers to the corporate plundering of every country turned upside down by American foreign policy. Kevin has given up arguing with him. So have I.

      You are right that one of the features of being a normal person is that you don’t even consider murdering people who fail to agree with you. I have never had to restrain myself from wilful cruelty to cats and dogs. I do not wrestle with the urge to eat babies, or to rape and murder and dismember women who sit opposite me in railway carriages. I’m glad to hear when people who do feel these or similar temptations don’t give way to them. At the same time, I try to arrange my life so that I don’t have to share physical space with such people. They possess a malignancy of character that shows itself in other ways. They are best avoided.

      Articles might be published about PM in medical journals. I do repeat, however, that he isn’t all there. This requires a certain pitying indulgence. Nothing anyone says will dissuade him from believing that you wear swastika underpants, and that I have no opinions at all, and that Kevin Carson is itching to take a knife to his throat – or, it may now seem, that you have your own designs on Kevin but are too cowardly to play the man. Just accept that every comment he makes on this blog proves how committed we are to tolerating anything that is not likely to get us into trouble with the authorities.

  15. My dear “Voldemort”.

    It is Sean Gabb (not me) who wants to put an electric fence on the border of England and Scotland – denying both freedom of movement, and freedom of trade. See his independence of England post on this very site.

    And it is Sean Gabb (not me) who spent more than six years pushing the work of Kevin Carson – the same Kevin Carson who has (repeatedly) expressed his support for international collectivism, the “Occupy” movement, the Chevez regime, the “social justice” savage mobs of Egypt (and on and on).

    As for you…..

    You walked into a thread about gun control – and did not write about gun control, instead your launched a personal (not political – personal) attack upon me.

    Your attack was (oddly enough) that I had said (ON A TOTALLY DIFFERENT thread) that combat with Carson and co SHOULD BE AVOIDED. No matter how high emotions run (the whole point of my original comment – which you quote out-of-context much as if you were a hack working for “Media Matters”).

    Are you saying that combat should NOT be avoided?

    Given your utter cowardice in dealing with me – it seems rather unlikely that you are going to go and kill Kevin Carson. And I am certainly not going to do it for you.

    “Voldemort” you seem unwilling even to try and kill me. Let alone Kevin.

    Instead you come on to a thread about immigration – and write nothing about about immigation, you just write another personal attack directed at me.

    Your mixture of aggression (seeking me out and writing personal attacks that have nothing to do with the matter at hand) and cowardice (hiding under a false name) is deeply silly.

    I pity you.

    By the way…….

    Do you actually have any opinions on immigration?

    If so, what are your opinions on immigration?

  16. Hello Sean.

    I asked Kevin to dissociate himself from the Egyption mobs after the rape of Lara Logan – as you know he did not.

    So your defence fails.

    And you have “forgotten” about Kevin siding with Chevez, and (repeatedly) with the international Occupy movement – whose violence (in such places as Oakland) is very much against INDIVIDUALS. And his support of the “Social Justice” movement round the world.

    As you know perfectly well, the principle of “Social Justice” is that all income and wealth rightfully belong to collective (“the people” or whatever) and should be “distributed” according to some political rule.

    It was not me who claimed that Kevin was a “Social Justice” man – he said so himself (repeatedly).

    Just as he has said (and said repeatedly) that he is a Socialist.

    I am still waiting for your friend to give his opinion as to whether I am wrong to argue that combat with Kevin and co should be AVOIDED. No matter how provoking he (and his Comrades) may be.

    Are you still going to carry on your take-words-out-of-context “Media Matters” like dance or not?

    And I am still wainting for your friend to actually give his opionions on “gun control” on the other thread.

    And on IMMIGRATION on this thread.

    For example, does he share your opinion that there should be no freedom of movement with a independent Scotland?

    And your “libertarian” opinion that there should be no freedom of trade with individuals and enterprises based in an independent Scotland?

    And your opinion that there should be an electric fence on the border of England and Scotland?

  17. Voldemort au Vent

    The great Jewish-Hungarian mathematician Paul Erdős said that there are problems for which mathematics is not yet ready. His namesake Mr Marks is a problem for which psychiatry is not yet ready. Will it ever be? I have my doubts. Perhaps the L.A. should set up a fund and seek to have Paul sealed in a cryogenic chamber, as much for his own sake as for society’s. If he’s thawed at intervals of a century or so, he might find that science eventually catches up with him.

    Anyway, I don’t know if you’re a Fawlty Towers fan, Paul, but if you are I’d like to remind you of the episode in which a psychiatrist, after watching Basil in action, remarks: “There’s enough material here for a conference.” You, my boy, could inspire a season of conferences, if not the creation of two or three new sub-disciplines. But bafflement and awe would be the only results. Let’s return to the boundless exegetical riches of that quote:

    “It would, of course, be emotionally satisfying to cut Kevin Carson’s Black Flagger (Black Flaggers like Carson will side with the Red Flagger Marxists – indeed they already are and have for years) throat, or blow his head off with a bullet (although he would be more likely to do those things to me) – but it is the job of politics to AVOID THAT SITUATION.”
    (https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/libertarian-self-marginalization/#comment-48626)

    Who, on seeing that, would believe Paul safe to employ in any capacity doing any kind of work whatsoever? It ought to preclude him for life not just from owning a firearm, knife or any other bladed or pointed instrument, but also from driving a car, having any kind of pet and living within fifteen miles of a school or hospital. It shrieks “Protective detention”. His refusal to acknowledge how appalling it is merely confirms his incorrigibility. Worse: he repeatedly attempts to defend it:

    Learn to read scumbag.

    I said that the purpose of politics (and so on) is to AVOID THAT SITUATION. To AVOID combat.

    I even put it in capital letters and you still do not understand.

    Truly you Nazi types are dumb.

    Yes, you put it in capital letters and I still failed to understood. Or to complete a picture of you as a calm, tolerant and self-controlled individual. EVEN THOUGH IT WAS IN CAPITALS. Truly we Nazi types are dumb. Indeed, operating in my capacity as nazi scumbag, I dumbly conclude that your libertarianism is completely bogus. Your espousal of libertarian causes is designed to make you seem virtuous, but your real purpose posting here is to promote Marksism and vandalize the blog, not to advance the cause of libertarianism. Marksism includes the pretence that “race” can be separated from culture and that the “immigration problem” is caused by mistaken policy.

    The frightening thing is, if Paul were better able to conceal his psychiatric status, he could quite easily be holding high political office or be high in the BBC or other part of the media. But enough already. Let’s not explore that avenue of thought. I don’t want to get Mr Gabb or Mr Davis into trouble.

    If so, what are your opinions on immigration?

    It is a v., v. Bad Thing. Yes, you’re here because of it, but that doesn’t outweigh the harm it does.

    Sean Gabb wrote:

    I have never had to restrain myself from wilful cruelty to cats and dogs. I do not wrestle with the urge to eat babies, or to rape and murder and dismember women who sit opposite me in railway carriages.

    Then clearly you’re not being open and honest with us. Resign at once and hand over the L.A. for a Marksist make-over.

    Articles might be published about PM in medical journals.

    That’s understating it. Medical journals might be published about PM.

  18. My dear “Voldemort” – the above does not seem a very good description of your opinions on immigration.

    “You are here because of it” – actually I am not immigrant and neither was my father or mother.

    Your hatred of me seems to be based on some sort or inherited ethnic-racial matter going back several generations – rather than on any (mythical) “immigration” by me or my parents.

    As for immigration being a “very bad thing”. Is that really all you have to say on the matter? How odd.

    Still I think of you have made it clear that you oppose my position of AVOIDING combat with Kevin Carson and the collectivist “Occupy” moverment in general.

    So “Voldemort” if you OPPOSE my policy of avoiding combat with Kevin Carson and the collectivist “Occupy” movement it is only logical to assume that you SUPPORT combat against Mr Carson and co.

    So “Voldemort” what is your plan to kill Mr Carson? I warn you that I strongly suspect that Kevin is a much more dangerious person than me – and as you seem terrified of me (so scared you even hide your personal attacks behind a false name) I do not rate your chances against Kevin Cason very highly.

    Will you not reconsider and see the wisdom in trying to AVOID combat with Kevin and co – even if this means useing the political process? After all that was the point of my original comment – which you continue to take out of context (almost as if you were an employee of “Media Matters”).

  19. Oh by the way “Voldemort” – do you support Sean Gabb’s position that there should be an electric fence on the border of England and Scotland, and that there should be a ban on FREE TRADE (of goods and services) as well the free movement of people?