I'm Sorta Getting it

Did I mention I'm reading Radicals for Capitalism? Of course I did. Several times.

The interesting thing about the experience is that I keep coming across idea that seem to be very Left-Wing. Naturally, I don't like them. Then I realize that they only bother me because of the current Statism that is intimately connected with them. If you remove the Government Tyranny from the equation, the ideas themselves are not necessarily offensive or dangerous.

Open borders is an example. Now, I'm not convinced that I can be talked into supporting it. But if you take it to its logical libertarian conclusions, libertarian Open Borders are quite different from Left-Wing ones.

Currently, Progressive Open Border policy "invites" millions of Mexicans into our country and then supports them with special privileges like "in-state" tuition, free education, free health care, unemployment, direct welfare payments, food stamps, affordable housing and free legal aid. They are encouraged to "keep their culture" and to "speak their language" by the true-believers in multi-culturalism.

On the other hand, libertarian Open Borders would "allow" Mexicans to enter the country. The end. A libertarian society would provide no education, health-care, food stamps, housing, welfare checks, legal aid, or anything else. If the Mexicans found work to support themselves, fine. If not, presumably they'd go home.

In a libertarian world, there would be no taxpayer funded bi-lingual ballots, no affirmative action hiring mandates, no required bi-lingual education.

So many of the things we resent about the Mexican Invasion would be eliminated. Without a government big and powerful enough to force these things down our throats, pressure and lobby groups would cease to exist. Who would they lobby? Who could enforce their demands?

In a libertarian world, each person is free to find his own way; but not free to force his way on anyone else. Mexicans could come here and try to make it just like everybody else. They'd find, without tribal minority communities supported largely by government largess, they'd have to learn English, embrace our ways, assimilate—in order to prosper. The ones who could cut it would succeed and stay, becoming our neighbors and friends. And who among us would mind that?

Okay, this is a "perfect" scenario, I admit. But the point is, a lot of what seems contrary to my current politics in libertarianism has to be considered in light of the entire libertarian world-view for it to be understood correctly.

Do not doubt that my first reaction to the idea that some libertarians (not all) support Open Borders nearly made me throw the book on the ground and stomp on it. But when it's woven into the tapestry of a fully libertarian society the perspective changes.

One would not despise Progressives nearly so much if there was no big government for them to use against us. I'd be happy for them to create all the collectives they wanted, on their own, supported by themselves, weaving baskets or running around naked in the snow. Whatevs.

They could open "alternative" schools and teach their own children whatever they liked, and we could make sure our children never came within a mile of them.

Without the government hammer, most of the Kumbaya crowd's ideas wouldn't get beyond tattered newsletters printed for each other (on recycled paper). It's never been about the efficacy of their ideas. It's always been about them using government power to force them down unwilling gullets. Without the guns of government, they're impotent.

If we had the sort of government libertarians want, an Obie presidency wouldn't matter much, because he couldn't do much. (Actually, I don't think he'd bother running for president of that sort of government. It wouldn't bring sufficient prestige or glory.)

And if that's not a good argument for VERY limited government, I don't know what is.

The Gunslinger