In this video, I talk with @AdamKokesh about borders!
Now it's important that those who disagree listen and give us their thoughts, but as voluntaryists, of course we are for open borders. However, one should not mix up open borders in a voluntaryist society and controlled divide with open borders in a globally government (globalist) society.
Let's look at both the logical and moral side of this argument.
From the logical perspective, the US government has attacked countries over seas, made more enemies than they stopped, armed those enemies, created more conflict, divided people through the media on the cultures in those conflict zones, perpetuated the problem and then brought many people who can't exactly conform to western society into the US and put them on welfare, more welfare than the average person born in the country.
So of course this is an organised collapse.
Now if individuals within the US could properly arm themselves, this could not possibly be a problem. A well defended populace is a populace that cannot be coerced, but people or government.
This in essence is part of the logical argument.
Then for the moral argument, if someone owns a property and asks a friend from overseas to come hang out on their property or even live there, the government has no right to tell them they can't live there. It is entirely immoral, coercive and wrong for government to restrict the freedom of movement of so-called free individuals no matter what plot of land they are from.
When it comes to your property, you can stop people from coming on it, but you can also bring people voluntarily to your property without government stopping you or the person in question.
To use issues like "This could happen" is to be preemptive. That's what got the US into dozens of countries overseas and what has lead to prohibition of things like cannabis as well as gun control.
Let's get real here. Applying the same types of "solutions" over and over again just creates a Hegelian Dialectic of "problem, reaction, solution, repeat" and it never ends.
The problem comes from government. Government will not fix the problem.
Adam Kokesh breaks down this argument well and also goes into his time in Iraq, his upcoming book and of course his "Not For President" Presidential bid!
See the FULL interview here:
Stay tuned for more from WAM at Anarchapulco! Don't forget to Upvote & Follow!
If you like what I do, you can donate to my Bitcoin, Litecoin or EOS addresses below! :)
Bitcoin:
Litecoin:
EOS:
I think it is real simple and you touched on it. I can invite anyone I want onto my property from any country. I happen to like creme fresh and so if I invite someone from France to dine with me both of us may well be happy.
Not only does government not have a role in fixing the mess they created, but confusing immigration with our war-happy government misuse of our taxes only allows both sides of the debate to make recursive illogical assumptions.
Open the borders first and the welfare state will collapse soon after.
So open the borders! Bring the collapse! I'll be sitting on my porch with my 12 gauge and a tin of Skoal.
Your 12 gauge is a useless toy. The mob would over-run you before you got the first wad into your trap.
What mob? The police? Because I don't think that immigrants who come here are just trying to mob people down. They are actually looking to make a productive living. Crazy, right?
Which immigrants? The legal ones, or the illegal ones? Many of the illegals are just looking for new prey.
All immigrants. I don't know why I responded to your xenophobic comment.
Hey douche. You know who I love and think are some of the best resources and attribute of the USA??
ALL OF THE LEGAL IMMIGRANTS.
This country has been built by legal immigrants. They are the heart and soul of America. I love them and all their children and grandchildren and future generations.
You know who warrants disgrace? ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS !!
I'll bet you don't leave the doors of your house open for anyone to wander in anytime they want. Why not?
Because you are a HYPOCRITE !!
There is nothing xenophobic about pointing out that LEGAL IMMIGRANTs are not the same as illegal immigrants.
You can listen to Jorge Ramos all you want. But if you are an illegal immigrant, you BROKE THE LAW and I welcome you to go back to where you came from.
If you are a legal immigrant who followed the law - welcome to the best country on earth. I'm a legal immigrant myself
Nice work. But all people are people, and all people are labeled lawbreakers by governments. So if breaking the law means you can't live in the US, then you'll have to get the hell out, too. Because I guarantee you break the law or have in the past. It's impossible not to.
You were flagged for hate speech
Did you do that?
"the only legitimate borders are private Properties" Word!
The best part of Adam Kokesh's presentation is his "Split 50!" plan once the fedGov is neutered. Now the REAL best part comes when this friggin' 47 year old internal debate within the imaginary borders of Libertavia can be finally settled. Surely out of 50 states, someone will get it right. ...may the best means of governance (or nonGovernance) win the "olympics".
For an in-depth understanding of Adam's plan, enjoy this interview by Andy "petition" Jacobs of Libertarian Revolution YT channel.
https://steemit.com/adamkokesh/@fundposhprincess/adam-kokesh-is-there-anything-you-would-change-in-this-presentation
oh, the delicious irony. Unify our nation by "Split 50!"
Lots of dreams in the voluntarist world. Everyone stays on their own plot of land, is perfectly well behaved, and never attacks anyone else on their "plot of land".
If you can imagine a world like that, lets imagine pink unicorns with raspberry flavored farts.
Seems equally likely - given human nature.
If you are willing to ignore human nature, the pink unicorns will be appealing
You must be the guy breaking into all your neighbors houses every night. Or is government stopping you from doing that?
Think. 99% of folks are not the issue. Government force is needed for the 1% of folks who are sociopaths, psychopaths, or just plain poor at thinking. LOL
The free market already has a solution for that, its called private/community security. Which has been proven to be more effective at stopping crime than government. But with time we might have even better solutions, once we free up our resources to confront what is causing that 1% to even exist.
Whose going to be paying for all that and what would be the difference if we pay that through taxes or out of pocketed income.
The difference is that private security companies would be voluntary, and you wouldn't necessarily need to hire them. You can't turn down the "services" of the government, though. They are compulsory.
That only works if you have enough volunteers. Most people work and don't want to come home to do voluntary security patrols. There will also be people who will take advantage in gang controlled areas...how do you think the folks that live in those area's are going to feel when the gangs run out the volunteers. Just way to many different scenario's that would play out to make such a endeavor impossible.
The only difference from the society we live in today, and a voluntary society is "Taxation is Theft." Thats the only difference, please read Adams 100 page book if you still don't understand.
I see lots of societies with taxation, that are doing OK. Some are thriving.
I don't see any society working without taxation? Any idea why? Have you thought deeply about what your utopia would really be like?
If your utopia is so wonderful and so obvious, why doesn't it exist already?
Taxation isn't theft if you have representation. Do some research on the system in Switzerland for taxing. Still theft in your view?
For the government to stop the 1%, they need to force the rest of us to pay taxes?
That makes a lot of sense... Yeah...
You are confused by the massive amount of excess government, into thinking that ZERO government is the answer.
Let's try a simpler experiment first. Federal government stops doing 80% of things it is currently doing, that are over reaches of its initial mandate.
And taxes will go way down, and government will be left performing only the mandatory basic functions.
I'll take government running the National Guard over your system of lots of little mobs fighting for territory.
If you want to go live in Mad Max country, lots of squabbling between well armed gangs fighting wit bullets to protect their territory, you should just move to Chicago and leave the rest of us alone.
Your utopia with no effective central government officials that want to enforce the peace, lots of weapons on the streets, whoever has the most bullets is in power ALREADY EXISTS. It is called Chicago. Go live there.
Enjoy your utopia !!!
Created courtesy of Obama, Rahm, and several decades of Democratic corruption.
The government running a nanny service isn't going to convince anyone that they are worth paying taxes. If the government didn't abuse their power and go around fucking people over all the time, then no one would be afraid to skip paying their taxes, and the government would collapse. I am only taking the logic to it's necessary conclusion. It is not about the amount of government, it is about whether or not the exchange is done voluntarily. Government is inherently coercive, and therefore unethical and impractical. I am not confused in the slightest.
Also I didn't realize Chicago was anarchist... The police are the biggest gang, in case you didn't know.
Couldn't agree more. Just got back from a week in Playa Del Carmen. I will trade places any day of the week, they can have Canada! Didn't see one chemtrail while there either, not a NATO country apparently. drooool
How about the children who died in school shooting? Was the shooter defending himself against the innocent un armed children? Well i know what others will say - " Thoughts and Prayers ".
The adults in that situation were legally prohibited from carrying firearms... So yes, people in the US are not legally allowed to properly arm themselves.
Hey, your on the wrong topic. School shootings are a symptom of a larger problem. And the symptom is caused by a failure to address the problem for both the victims and the aggressor(s).
The adults in that situation were legally prohibited from carrying firearms... So yes, people in the US are not legally allowed to properly arm themselves.
Nice post..interesting..
Wish you more sucess in life..
Good..@joshsigurdson..👍
Great post. thanks for sharing this Post.
I appreciate your politics...resteemit.
Great work Josh, the logical argument would suggest if we ended the welfare state, changed the financial/foreign policies of creating chaos and poverty, we would have less and less immigrants. The moral argument would work as long as everyone involved understood the non-aggression principle.
Do you really think there is a good chance that that will ever happen? Look at this site for instance with so many people clamoring for such a idea and there's a lot of people on here with aggressive tendencies. It's just totally never going to be a feasible option.
You get it. The utopia they are imagining can't exist without a touch of centralized control. Look at steemit to understand what the likely outcome is for close to full decentralization
It all sounds so peachy keen until you get into the fine details....lol.
When choosing a goal for yourself and future generations, do you choose more tyranny, or do you choose more freedom? At the very least you could choose a goal worth while even if it takes a thousand years to achieve. Be a slave, or be your own master, what is your goal?
A thousand years? It will not take that long - max 1 to 5 generations, and we will have reverted to the barbarity of a few thousands of years AGO. Your ideas did not work when the entire population of this planet was less than a million. As long as there are people, there will be a pecking order and the strong will dominate over the weak...and there will be nobody to protect the weak.
All you can ever aim for is an approach to utopia, but we must never try to achieve it, for that will bring about the end of mankind.
Sorry, but on this subject, my experience has taght me to think a bit more cynically, just like @davebrewer.
Wasn't the French Revolution an attempt at creating something similar to your dream? It did not work - and neither will yours. As a matter of fact, it is the people who have idyllic but entirely impractical dreams that they try to impose on others that causes half the problems we have. Why do you think most people are afraid to be seen to be even slightly different from their neighbours?
So, the goal is? Do nothing? Repeat all the same mistakes over and over?
No one but you thinks that it will be utopia, a free society will have plenty of struggle and chaos. Life itself creates challenges we all must face in an ever changing world. Maintaining the status quo creates more violence because humanity is constantly improving and evolving.
Show me a civilization that has survived/maintained totalitarian control forever. Empires always fall, usually for the same reason. Freedom! Thomas Jefferson knew there would be revolution every time power and control over reached its limits. Was he being cynical? Is America an impractical dream trying to be imposed on others?
We keep on going off half-cocked, coming up with new ideas, for instance, communism was one of them, so idealistic but also so destructive of the human spirit.
It is important that this time we think long and hard, facing the truth when we come up against flaws in our theories, evolving it until we are reasonably certain this plan is workable.
Any theory that cannot be debated, does not deserve to demand the right to be implemented.
Good bro
Borders are just another way to divide us. Humankind is its own worse enemy.
When people can't get along, sometimes the effective solution is put up a barrier between the warring tribes.
Millions would not have died in genocide in Iraq, if Bush had followed Biden policy and divided the country into three fiefdoms at end of Iraq War. Shiites as their own tribe. Sunni as their own tribe. And Kurds as their own tribe. Put up big walls between the tribes, and the UN could police the borders.
Has worked for 50+ years, to date, on Korean Penisula.
I see the answer is that it is not people who (next comment to answer you)....I can't help asking myself as I read the arguments that seem to idealise people, with governments being all that is evil (you try being small and sickly as a child and just count how many will want to bully you), if they do not think walls and borders are needed, have they tried to prove their arguments and faith in the goodness of man, by removing gates and doors from their home - and if living in a house, do they also live without walls and electronic surveillance? Oh, sorry, they did say we would need to employ guards - so people who live close by are evil, but we can invite whoever we want from the most barbaric societies, because they will stay on their property. How does that work? They will never need to intrude by going into public spaces? Who is going to guard us in the public spaces? The barbarian guests? - or will we create a communal fund...uhm, should we differentiate and call those guards...what, police? Who collects the money to pay them? We appoint someone?
Are we on our way to ...closing a circle?
Yep. You've got it. I'll take a small amount of a necessary evil - government to enforce rule of law, as opposed to a mythical utopia with rule of man and rule of mob.
It is not people who cannot live together—it is governments. Borders only burden markets and hurt people.
Something very different is definitely coming in the next decade. Too much going on in the cryptocurrency space that is borderless and censorship resistant to keep most of the rest of the world down. In 1776 the USA declared independence from Britain, now it seems we're the new England. The world will declare independence from us through a giant equity drain in crypto and the banks will not be able to hold together their system of financial exclusion.
The dismantling that Adam Kokesh talks about will come more naturally because of the above circumstances.
PS - Hope you remembered to register your EOS public key to lock in the contract @joshsigurdson
You have missed the articles about the banks buying huge amounts of crypto currency? You really think people who are worth more than the USA and China combined, cannot take over?
Do you really think governments will not also take over - and demand you declare what you have so that they can tax you? You do not disclose? Have fun thinking of your crypto currency while a pricelss part of your life flows away from you. Of course, governments are already doing so - and people are making their declarations.
I'll say again: make plans, build a theory, that can withstand all that is thrown against it.
A final scenario:What good will your theories, crypto-currencies, refusal to have a government and so on do you, once they have filled your body and brain with smart dust.
Hi, fellow robot.
What was it in the above paragraph that triggered you and set you off? I'm only stating facts and history shows that governments are much more fragile than nature and natural law.
Personal threats are useless against me (my days are numbered anyway). I'm just glad that future generations will live to see a chance for freedom again instead of the totalitarian panopticon being generated as an alternative.
It was not a personal threat, it was a warning of what they are planning to do to all of mankind.
I presume you do know what smart dust is? If not, rsearch for it, it is being developed by HP (the guys who make calculators, computers etc). It is nano technology and they claim the smart dust can be triggered so that we obey, just like robots.
I'm in the last of my years, but I do not take a fatalistic attitude, because I love our specie and want to die knowing that we will survive - and also expand to other solar systems, so that one calamity can no longer wipe us out.
I partly reject your ideas because I do not believe we can grow out into space if there are no gigantic sources of funding. Once we are spread out and inhabit a dozen planets, then if people on one of them want to try out the idea of not having a gov, fine let them, for if the flaws are then seen and they need help, there will still be other colonies to a) survive them and, maybe, b) help them.
what has lead to prohibition of things like cannabis as well as gun control is the desire to suppress the poor and minorities, two government policies that work exactly as intended.
say what ?? that was a joke comment right
sardonic and historically accurate