about us
  news from other sites
 Libertarian Theory
  Austrian School
  Business Cycles
  Gold Standard
  Private education
  Greenhouse effects
  Abortion, Euthanasia, Suicide
  Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs
  Cryogen suspension
  Food and Medicine /Right to choose your own
  Health Care
 International Relations
  Development Help
  Europe and EU /Uniting Europe without the Union
  Secession Right
  War on Terrorism
  Gun Rights
  Human Rights /Emancipation
  Property Rights
  Self Defence
  Speech Freedom
  Values and Norms
 Rights, Justice
  Punishment and restitution
  War on Drugs
  Social security
  Internet Freedom
  Privacy and Encryption
 Repression and Police State
  Database State
Today: Thu, April 24 2014  -  Last modified: April, 26 2007
 International Relations
25 March 2014
Would (Our) Open Borders Lead to (Their) Closed Borders?
by Bryan Caplan
 sub-topic» Migration

Anna's question, though, is whether liberalizing immigration restrictions would lead to emigration restrictions. In countries that already restrict emigration, this scenario is easy to believe. But what about the vast majority of countries that don't currently restrict emigration? Would liberalization really lead more than a handful to this desperate and humiliating measure?

14 October 2013
In Praise of Illegal Immigrants
by Skyler J. Collins
 sub-topic» Migration

Most conservatives and many "libertarians" decry the presence of illegal immigrants in the United States and elsewhere. They seemingly consider them to be less than human, calling them "illegals" with an air of contempt. It also seems that, to them, one of the worst crimes one could commit is the act of immigrating, that is "moving," without permission from the state. Are "illegals" less than human? Is their crime among the worst that can be committed? I give a resounding "NO!" in answer to both questions. In fact, I consider "illegals" to be the best residents a country can have. Here's why.

04 September 2013
Open Borders is a Moderate Position
by Bryan Caplan
 sub-topic» Migration

As a practical matter, open borders is a radical position: If implemented, our economy and society would swiftly and dramatically change. As a philosophical matter, though, open borders is a moderate position. "Free to choose" stands between the extremes of "Mandatory" and "Forbidden." Open borders stands between the extremes of nationalist restriction and socialist mandate. Facebook clearly grasps the distinction: The individual who creates a group decides who's in and who's out. The critics of immigration really should stop talking as if this familiar option doesn't even exist.

31 August 2013
The real reason we like immigration so much
by Sam Bowman
 sub-topic» Migration

Martha Gill has a good piece on immigration on the Telegraph Blogs site today, pointing out the simple fact that people often forget: the main reason immigration is such a good thing is that it's really, really good for immigrants.

08 August 2013
Borders? What Borders? - Part 2
by Neil Lock
 sub-topic» Migration

Even this attitude, though, is only half way toward a fuller understanding. Slowly, people are starting to see today’s political society for what it is – a system in which a corrupt political class and its crony-capitalist hangers-on solicit just enough support from the lazy and the feckless to enable them to rule, without concern, over everyone else. And, once this insight is reached, national identity and fellow feeling can never be re-gained.

Further, how can the “UK” possibly be justified as a political unit? For, if an Englishman has a country, is his country not England, rather than some arbitrary construction called the “UK?” And if this “UK” was a natural political unit, then how could the partition of Ireland possibly have happened, and how could Scottish independence even be under discussion? (Let’s not even mention absorption into the EU…)

07 August 2013
Borders? What Borders? - Part 1
by Neil Lock
 sub-topic» Migration

So in a libertarian world, land (and water, too) would, I think, become divided into two types of space. There would be private (owned) space, with borders and designated easements. And there would be public (open to all) space, made up of those easements. (There would also be, for a while at least, a third kind of space – un-owned, unclaimed space. But that, too, is open to all, so I will treat it as public space).

Furthermore, I expect there would be, ultimately, only one public space, which would be connected. That is, any point of it would be accessible from any other without leaving the public space.

02 August 2013
Immigration freedom is personal liberty. Borders are statism
by Rad Geek
 sub-topic» Migration

When people move from one place to another without using violence, without trespassing on others’ land, and go to places where they’ve been invited to stay by mutual agreement with the property owner, that’s not an “invasion” in any meaningful sense of the word, any more than I “invaded” Michigan after I graduated from college, or any more than I “invade” the Waffle House when I go there to get some hash browns.

28 June 2013
Immigration: The Practice of the Principle
by Don Boudreaux
 sub-topic» Migration

As Frank Buckley’s quotation above reveals, concern over the likely voting patterns of immigrants is nothing new. Past fears seem, from the perspective of 2013, to have been unjustified. Or, at the very least, the benefits immigrants from 1789-2013 have brought to America almost surely overwhelm whatever costs immigrants might have inflicted via the ballot box on the economy.

20 February 2013
Should Amercians Emigrate or Defect?
by Wendy McElroy
 sub-topic» Migration

America is like the postwar city of Berlin. Borders are still open and they offer relatively free passage, officially or unofficially. But the wall is being built to close that porous border. Those who are planning to leave should decide if they are an emigrant or a defector. Otherwise the decision may be taken out of their hands and decided by the state.

26 October 2011
Illegal Immigrants: The Statist Scapegoat
by Jacob G. Hornberger
 sub-topic» Migration

Supplementary message to Republicans and Democrats: You — yes, you — are responsible for our nation’s economic woes. Specifically, your welfare-state paradigm and your warfare-state paradigm are taking our country down. Your socialism, your interventionism, your militarism, your imperialism. That’s the problem.

Yes, it’s your statism — the statism that you statists have foisted on our country — that is the root of our nation’s problems. That’s the cause of the unemployment. That’s the cause of the out-of-control spending and debt. That’s the cause of the monetary debasement. That’s the cause of the booms, bubbles, and busts.

The problem is that you people simply cannot take personal responsibility for what you have wrought with your statism. So, you do what statist regimes have done throughout history. You look for scapegoats when economic conditions go bad. Illegal immigrants are your convenient scapegoat. They’re not in a position to defend themselves.