How Libertarian Are You?

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I've cued this video to the 2-minute opening statement by Chase , one of 2 Libertarian candidates on stage for this "also ran" debate. It's my feeling that he gives a pretty good summary of the traditional libertarian position on a variety of issues.

What do you think? How much do you agree with the general stances he articulates?

 

[alaskanseminole]

I was enjoying him right up until he said to close ALL our bases and bring our troops home. WTH!?

Yes, Mr. Libertarian, the primary role of the military is to defend our country, but having U.S. military bases around the globe serves several crucial purposes. You know I like to use the bullet feature, so here ya go:

• Firstly, they act as strategic outposts, allowing for rapid response to emerging threats and crises in various regions.
• Secondly, these bases facilitate international partnerships and alliances, fostering cooperation with other nations to address shared security challenges.
• Thirdly, they serve as deterrents to potential adversaries, signaling America's commitment to global stability and security.

I'm okay with scaling back our military presence in some cases, complete removal could jeopardize national security interests, undermine diplomatic efforts, and diminish America's ability to effectively respond to global threats and crises (It's not like the Middle East or NK will say, "Whew, they're gone. Let's get back to living peacefully.") T

IMO, maintaining a strategic network of military bases around the world remains vital to safeguarding U.S. interests and promoting peace and stability on the international stage.

 

[TC Nole OX]

Credit to a very wise Canadian friend who summarized libertarianism quite well - it works if you are a caveman who is planning on living until around age 20.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

I was enjoying him right up until he said to close ALL our bases and bring our troops home. WTH!?

Yes, Mr. Libertarian, the primary role of the military is to defend our country, but having U.S. military bases around the globe serves several crucial purposes. You know I like to use the bullet feature, so here ya go:

• Firstly, they act as strategic outposts, allowing for rapid response to emerging threats and crises in various regions.
• Secondly, these bases facilitate international partnerships and alliances, fostering cooperation with other nations to address shared security challenges.
• Thirdly, they serve as deterrents to potential adversaries, signaling America's commitment to global stability and security.

I'm okay with scaling back our military presence in some cases, complete removal could jeopardize national security interests, undermine diplomatic efforts, and diminish America's ability to effectively respond to global threats and crises (It's not like the Middle East or NK will say, "Whew, they're gone. Let's get back to living peacefully.") T

IMO, maintaining a strategic network of military bases around the world remains vital to safeguarding U.S. interests and promoting peace and stability on the international stage.

Certainly SOME bases make sense, but how many? I saw a listing recently that put our bases at more than a thousand, but I can't find that again. Here's another look (since you like bullet points). From an anti-bases group, and a couple of years old. I have not fact-check their numbers.

• There are approximately 750 U.S. military base sites abroad in 80 foreign countries and colonies.
• The United States has nearly three times as many bases abroad (750) as U.S. embassies, consulates, and missions worldwide (276).
• While there are approximately half as many installations as at the Cold War’s end, U.S. bases have spread to twice as many countries and colonies (from 40 to 80) in the same time, with large concentrations of facilities in the Middle East, East Asia, parts of Europe, and Africa.
• The United States has at least three times as many overseas bases as all other countries combined.
• U.S. bases abroad cost taxpayers an estimated $55 billion annually.
• Construction of military infrastructure abroad has cost taxpayers at least $70 billion since 2000, and could total well over $100 billion.
• Bases abroad have helped the United States launch wars and other combat operations in at least 25 countries since 2001.
• U.S. installations are found in at least 38 non-democratic countries and colonies.

Drawdown: Improving U.S. and Global Security Through Military Base Closures Abroad - World BEYOND War

By David Vine, Patterson Deppen, and Leah Bolger, World BEYOND War, September 20, 2021 Executive Summary Despite the withdrawal of U.S. military bases and troops from Afghanistan, the United States continues to maintain around 750 military bases abroad in 80 foreign countries and colonies...

worldbeyondwar.org

 

[seminole97]

diminish America's ability to effectively respond to global threats and crises (It's not like the Middle East or NK will say, "Whew, they're gone. Let's get back to living peacefully.")

Are you of the opinion the US has effectively made the Middle East peaceful the last 30 years?

 

[alaskanseminole]

Certainly SOME bases make sense, but how many? I saw a listing recently that put our bases at more than a thousand, but I can't find that again. Here's another look (since you like bullet points). From an anti-bases group, and a couple of years old. I have not fact-check their numbers.

• There are approximately 750 U.S. military base sites abroad in 80 foreign countries and colonies.
• The United States has nearly three times as many bases abroad (750) as U.S. embassies, consulates, and missions worldwide (276).
• While there are approximately half as many installations as at the Cold War’s end, U.S. bases have spread to twice as many countries and colonies (from 40 to 80) in the same time, with large concentrations of facilities in the Middle East, East Asia, parts of Europe, and Africa.
• The United States has at least three times as many overseas bases as all other countries combined.
• U.S. bases abroad cost taxpayers an estimated $55 billion annually.
• Construction of military infrastructure abroad has cost taxpayers at least $70 billion since 2000, and could total well over $100 billion.
• Bases abroad have helped the United States launch wars and other combat operations in at least 25 countries since 2001.
• U.S. installations are found in at least 38 non-democratic countries and colonies.

Drawdown: Improving U.S. and Global Security Through Military Base Closures Abroad - World BEYOND War

By David Vine, Patterson Deppen, and Leah Bolger, World BEYOND War, September 20, 2021 Executive Summary Despite the withdrawal of U.S. military bases and troops from Afghanistan, the United States continues to maintain around 750 military bases abroad in 80 foreign countries and colonies...

worldbeyondwar.org

I do think we can close some of them and over the last several decades, that is exactly what BRAC has done. We've even come up with the weird joint-basing structure, like JBSA and JBER.

Shortly after OEF kicked off, I was privy to some extensive pre-deployment training some of which was about the terrorist training camps spread out across Afghanistan. Without getting too much into it, the concept was basically, A. we need to disrupt these camps and B. better to fight them over there, then over here. I think I've said it before, I was a big proponent of OEF, but not OIF.

...I digress, there is value (as stated above) in having a U.S. military presence around the world, but I'm okay with scaling it back to some extent. I kind of liken it to this way of thinking. I don't like the responsibility of leadership; however, the benefit of being a part of leadership is being part of the decision making and influencing actions of any organization. The U.S. needs to stay at the forefront of that leadership.

 

[QuadCityHawkeye1976]

Libertarians at the end of the day will vote Republican. They don’t really exist it’s just a cool terms to use when you don’t want to admit you really are a Republican.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Are you of the opinion the US has effectively made the Middle East peaceful the last 30 years?

Nope. It's a mess and I'd wish we'd learn from our mistakes. Take Iraq for instance. Did we really think that removing Saddam (which needed to happen) and installing a Democratic government would some how unite the Northern Kurds, Central Sunnis and Southern Shias? Realistically, Iraq needed to be separated into completely different states/countries, but who gets the oil which is primarily located in east of Baghdad, and the northeastern Kirkuk region?

The U.S. had a great war plan. They failed at the, "We're here. Now what?" portion.

 

[joelbc1]

Not very. Human beings need oversight and never outgrow the need for “parental direction.” Libertarianism is a cop out for being selfish. “My freedoms” is a close second.

 

[Moral]

American mainstream libertarians I'm maybe 50% on board with, the other 50% is a poison pill for me though. Libertarian socialists pique my interest a bit more.

 

[seminole97]

Nope.

Why can’t you recognize that abolishes your premise about the value of these interventions?

How can you look back and say, “yeah, that was a **** up, killed hundreds of thousands. But we need to be out there doing it!”

If it’s failure after failure, maybe, just maybe we should stop.

 

[Hawk_4shur]

Libertarian concepts tend to sound fine, but what does it really mean in action? What are the specific tactics to convert this country to a Libertarian form of government?

He talks about closing bases around the world, which I disagree with. He says big banks are screwing people over - what would they be doing without government regulations? Wants to let in immigrants - how? Just let them come in without social security numbers or any effort to get them on the tax roles?

It's simply a concept without a real plan.

 

[seminole97]

Not very. Human beings need oversight and never outgrow the need for “parental direction.”

“They would be the shepherds over us, their sheep. Certainly such an arrangement presupposes that they are naturally superior to the rest of us. And certainly we are fully justified in demanding from the legislators and organizers proof of this natural superiority.”

Libertarianism is a cop out for being selfish. “My freedoms” is a close second.

Explain how anyone’s freedoms are selfless and not selfish.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Why can’t you recognize that abolishes your premise about the value of these interventions?

How can you look back and say, “yeah, that was a **** up, killed hundreds of thousands. But we need to be out there doing it!”

If it’s failure after failure, maybe, just maybe we should stop.

Two different topics.

Military base presence in places like Qatar and Germany (for example) posture us for (read post #2). Military presence IN Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. are active military engagements. Which one do you want to discuss? We've clearly merged two topics, not sure who's fault that is, but I'll apologize for my peeing in the water portion.

 

[seminole97]

Libertarians at the end of the day will vote Republican. They don’t really exist it’s just a cool terms to use when you don’t want to admit you really are a Republican.

They vote Republican at the end of day because that’s the only side ever saying out loud (if never actually doing anything) that government efforts should be rolled back.

If you’re a libertarian who wants to see the government do much less, why would you pull the lever for Democrats who have more and more plans for the government to provide this or that?

 

[joelbc1]

“They would be the shepherds over us, their sheep. Certainly such an arrangement presupposes that they are naturally superior to the rest of us. And certainly we are fully justified in demanding from the legislators and organizers proof of this natural superiority.”


Explain how anyone’s freedoms are selfless and not selfish.

What. I never said that...I said “libertarianism” and “my rights” ARE selfish.

 

[seminole97]

Two different topics.

Military base presence in places like Qatar and Germany (for example) posture us for (read post #2). Military presence IN Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. are active military engagements. Which one do you want to discuss? We've clearly merged two topics, not sure whose fault that is, but I'll apologize for my peeing in the water portion.

Our efforts in Syria have fed a humanitarian disaster that has seen hundreds of thousands die and millions displaced. We should get out of these foreign bases and stop trying to regime change and partition foreign countries.

“But without our foreign bases in Germany we couldn’t have these foreign bases in Syria.”

You just justified getting rid of both.

 

[alaskanseminole]

Our efforts in Syria have fed a humanitarian disaster that has seen hundreds of thousands die and millions displaced. We should get out of these foreign bases and stop trying to regime change and partition foreign countries.

“But without our foreign bases in Germany we couldn’t have these foreign bases in Syria.”

You just justified getting rid of both.

I'm sorry you're seeing it that way. Maybe the issue isn't the "presence of the bases", but rather U.S. policy. Fix the policy, leave the bases.

 

[QuadCityHawkeye1976]

They vote Republican at the end of day because that’s the only side ever saying out loud (if never actually doing anything) that government efforts should be rolled back.

If you’re a libertarian who wants to see the government do much less, why would you pull the lever for Democrats who have more and more plans for the government to provide this or that?

The Republican obsession with trans people is just one example of them not wanting to roll back stuff.

 

[hawkeyetraveler]

I would almost certainly be labeled a classic libertarian before the MAGA makeover that seems to have happened in the last decade. I believe in:

• Small government, but do support limited regulation to thwart the worst aspects of our greedy nature. This means a smaller military, less federal support on numerous issues, etc.
• Much flatter and fairer tax structure. There are simply too many loopholes, etc. Overhaul and simplify the tax code: limited deductions, no difference between capital gains income and normal income, etc.
• Women have a right to choose, although I would be ok with a compromise at maybe 18-20 weeks
• If people want to express themselves as a different gender, different pronouns, etc then have at it. I don’t understand it, but I also support with all my heart your right to be and feel happy. just don’t yell at me when I make a mistake, I do my best, but it is confusing sometimes. Also I agree with the right that biological males that have gone through puberty should not be competing in women’s sports. It simply isn’t fair to women.
• Marry who you want, believe in what you want, celebrate what you want, be who you want. I believe diversity makes us stronger. BUT: diversity doesn’t mean division and isolation. The safe space concept bothers me greatly. We need to learn how to embrace each other, not throw up walls.
• I am ok with gun ownership, but this is where I think we need common sense regulation which I define as: if you have a history of criminal behavior (even in childhood), or mental illness, must pass through some significant hoops. We need the same protections on all gun sales, big time felony penalties for ghost guns, mandatory safe storage, etc. If you are an upstanding citizen, I have no issue with gun ownership, if you have any history at all - sorry you don’t get a gun without additional hurdles…and maybe not then.

 

[BrianNole777]

Zippy.

They're utopian dreamers, IMO.

 

[ft254]

Our efforts in Syria have fed a humanitarian disaster that has seen hundreds of thousands die and millions displaced. We should get out of these foreign bases and stop trying to regime change and partition foreign countries.

“But without our foreign bases in Germany we couldn’t have these foreign bases in Syria.”

You just justified getting rid of both.

Situational events that ebb and flow as conditions change. Strategic presence is critical to stabilize the region. It hasn't been an issue of regime change. You continue to prove you have no concept of the U.S.'s role of free world leadership.

 

[alaskanseminole]

I won't break them all down, but I'll address a few.

• Small government, but do support limited regulation to thwart the worst aspects of our greedy nature. This means a smaller military, less federal support on numerous issues, etc.

I'm for a strong defense and expansive budget to accomplish this; however, I think the government should hold defense contract companies to tighter performance requirements. We've spent way too much on failed R&D. We also need to completely overhaul how military branches are awarded funds. I've spent too many September 30th nights with senior leadership trying to find ways to spend our remaining budget so we can get the same or more the next year. "I know. Let's get 65" TVs for all the sections and upgrade the Ops floors!" Yes, that happened at my last unit.

• If people want to express themselves as a different gender, different pronouns, etc then have at it. I don’t understand it, but I also support with all my heart your right to be and feel happy. just don’t yell at me when I make a mistake, I do my best, but it is confusing sometimes. Also I agree with the right that biological males that have gone through puberty should not be competing in women’s sports. It simply isn’t fair to women.

I agree, I think it's weird as hell, but at the end of the day how does it personally affect me? It doesn't. Fairness in athletics is the only place where I see the legitimate conflict, not in day-to-day existence.

• Marry who you want, believe in what you want, celebrate what you want, be who you want. I believe diversity makes us stronger. BUT: diversity doesn’t mean division and isolation. The safe space concept bothers me greatly. We need to learn how to embrace each other, not throw up walls.

America is all over the place on this, it's either fear driven segregation or the opposite, forced diversity. My friends group is organically made up of people who I find commonality with. Anyone outside that should be treated as Christ called us to in Matthew 22.

• I am ok with gun ownership, but this is where I think we need common sense regulation which I define as: if you have a history of criminal behavior (even in childhood), or mental illness, must pass through some significant hoops. We need the same protections on all gun sales, big time felony penalties for ghost guns, mandatory safe storage, etc. If you are an upstanding citizen, I have no issue with gun ownership, if you have any history at all - sorry you don’t get a gun without additional hurdles…and maybe not then.

This seems so easy, doesn't it? It's infuriating that NOTHING gets done out of fear.

Politicians sure do a great job of controlling the population through it (fear).

 

[General Tso]

69%

 

[ButtersHawk]

I would almost certainly be labeled a classic libertarian before the MAGA makeover that seems to have happened in the last decade. I believe in:

• Small government, but do support limited regulation to thwart the worst aspects of our greedy nature. This means a smaller military, less federal support on numerous issues, etc.
• Much flatter and fairer tax structure. There are simply too many loopholes, etc. Overhaul and simplify the tax code: limited deductions, no difference between capital gains income and normal income, etc.
• Women have a right to choose, although I would be ok with a compromise at maybe 18-20 weeks
• If people want to express themselves as a different gender, different pronouns, etc then have at it. I don’t understand it, but I also support with all my heart your right to be and feel happy. just don’t yell at me when I make a mistake, I do my best, but it is confusing sometimes. Also I agree with the right that biological males that have gone through puberty should not be competing in women’s sports. It simply isn’t fair to women.
• Marry who you want, believe in what you want, celebrate what you want, be who you want. I believe diversity makes us stronger. BUT: diversity doesn’t mean division and isolation. The safe space concept bothers me greatly. We need to learn how to embrace each other, not throw up walls.
• I am ok with gun ownership, but this is where I think we need common sense regulation which I define as: if you have a history of criminal behavior (even in childhood), or mental illness, must pass through some significant hoops. We need the same protections on all gun sales, big time felony penalties for ghost guns, mandatory safe storage, etc. If you are an upstanding citizen, I have no issue with gun ownership, if you have any history at all - sorry you don’t get a gun without additional hurdles…and maybe not then.

Is it weird if I shed a tear?

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

Libertarians at the end of the day will vote Republican. They don’t really exist it’s just a cool terms to use when you don’t want to admit you really are a Republican.

As of August 2022, there are 310 Libertarians holding elected office: 193 of them partisan offices and 117 of them non-partisan offices. There are 693,634 voters registered as Libertarian in the 31 states that report Libertarian.

Gary Johnson received 4.5 million votes in 2016.

Jo Jorgensen received 1.9 million votes in 2020.

Weird take considering there are actually Libertarian’s holding office and receiving votes in major U.S. elections.

I voted Johnson in 2016. I voted Biden in 2020. I consider myself fairly close to the positions of the libertarian party.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

Libertarians at the end of the day will vote Republican. They don’t really exist it’s just a cool terms to use when you don’t want to admit you really are a Republican.

Often true. More true today than when I was first exposed to libertarianism.

Plus, most American libertarians these days aren't really libertarians. Some examples...

Oliver seems to favor open borders. Shocking! But this is a sound libertarian position. Individual freedom obviously includes the freedom to move around and to look for better places to work, live and raise a family. Freedom also includes employers' freedom to hire whomever they want. That's not to say that libertarians will permit invasions or have no laws about immigration but open borders will be the default stance in ordinary times.

If I want to hire an undocumented worker, so what?

If I want to rent rooms to an undocumented family, so what?

Another failing of modern American libertarians is their disregard of the danger of concentrated corporate power. Drown the federal government in the bathtub, but let Exxon pollute with impunity and Google spy on everybody unchecked. Deny public education but support religious indoctrination. Those are not libertarian positions.

True libertarians support a woman's right to choose.

True libertarians may be amused or annoyed by the gender wars and other so-called woke issues, but they fundamentally don't care.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

I would almost certainly be labeled a classic libertarian before the MAGA makeover that seems to have happened in the last decade. I believe in:

• Small government, but do support limited regulation to thwart the worst aspects of our greedy nature. This means a smaller military, less federal support on numerous issues, etc.
• Much flatter and fairer tax structure. There are simply too many loopholes, etc. Overhaul and simplify the tax code: limited deductions, no difference between capital gains income and normal income, etc.
• Women have a right to choose, although I would be ok with a compromise at maybe 18-20 weeks
• If people want to express themselves as a different gender, different pronouns, etc then have at it. I don’t understand it, but I also support with all my heart your right to be and feel happy. just don’t yell at me when I make a mistake, I do my best, but it is confusing sometimes. Also I agree with the right that biological males that have gone through puberty should not be competing in women’s sports. It simply isn’t fair to women.
• Marry who you want, believe in what you want, celebrate what you want, be who you want. I believe diversity makes us stronger. BUT: diversity doesn’t mean division and isolation. The safe space concept bothers me greatly. We need to learn how to embrace each other, not throw up walls.
• I am ok with gun ownership, but this is where I think we need common sense regulation which I define as: if you have a history of criminal behavior (even in childhood), or mental illness, must pass through some significant hoops. We need the same protections on all gun sales, big time felony penalties for ghost guns, mandatory safe storage, etc. If you are an upstanding citizen, I have no issue with gun ownership, if you have any history at all - sorry you don’t get a gun without additional hurdles…and maybe not then.

Very similar.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

As of August 2022, there are 310 Libertarians holding elected office: 193 of them partisan offices and 117 of them non-partisan offices. There are 693,634 voters registered as Libertarian in the 31 states that report Libertarian.

Gary Johnson received 4.5 million votes in 2016.

Jo Jorgensen received 1.9 million votes in 2020.

Weird take considering there are actually Libertarian’s holding office and receiving votes in major U.S. elections.

I voted Johnson in 2016. I voted Biden in 2020. I consider myself fairly close to the positions of the libertarian party.

A question I've wondered about since 2016: If Hillary had won, would the Rs have vilified Gary Johnson voters as much as Dems vilified Jill Stein voters when Trump won?

I'm guessing yes - maybe more so - but I don't really know.

Worth mentioning that Gary more than doubled Jill's vote count, iirc.

 

[rfgiowa]

National defense and infrastructure are the two platforms that belong to the feds. Cheers and GO HAWKS!

 

[DropitlikeitsHawk]

Not very. Human beings need oversight and never outgrow the need for “parental direction.” Libertarianism is a cop out for being selfish. “My freedoms” is a close second.

Wow is this stupid.

 

[ottumwan in tx]

I've cued this video to the 2-minute opening statement by Chase , one of 2 Libertarian candidates on stage for this "also ran" debate. It's my feeling that he gives a pretty good summary of the traditional libertarian position on a variety of issues.

What do you think? How much do you agree with the general stances he articulates?

View embedded media

he is absolutely way off base and is not a good libertarian and is indeed a far left democrat in hiding

two or three clues
1. banking big wigs screwed the little guy
2. immigrants not the problem
3. older generation screwed him cuz he's 39
4. hitler haircut

 

[ottumwan in tx]

Libertarians at the end of the day will vote Republican. They don’t really exist it’s just a cool terms to use when you don’t want to admit you really are a Republican.

I tell everyone I'm either a libertarian leaning republican or a republican leaning libertarian.

 

[HawkeyeShawn]

A question I've wondered about since 2016: If Hillary had won, would the Rs have vilified Gary Johnson voters as much as Dems vilified Jill Stein voters when Trump won?

I'm guessing yes - maybe more so - but I don't really know.

Worth mentioning that Gary more than doubled Jill's vote count, iirc.

Definitely worth mentioning. I’m one of those 2M+ that felt it was important to vote Biden over Trump. 2016 was more of a protest vote against both Clinton and Trump.

2024. If it’s Trump v Biden, Damnit, I’ll have to vote Biden again. I want zero responsibility for Trump winning.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

I don’t care what mistakes people make in the name of freedom of choice.

Bugs the shit out of me when they want other peoples money to bail them out of those mistakes.

 

[Bow.to.the.Narrative]

Nope. It's a mess and I'd wish we'd learn from our mistakes. Take Iraq for instance. Did we really think that removing Saddam (which needed to happen) and installing a Democratic government would some how unite the Northern Kurds, Central Sunnis and Southern Shias? Realistically, Iraq needed to be separated into completely different states/countries, but who gets the oil which is primarily located in east of Baghdad, and the northeastern Kirkuk region?

The U.S. had a great war plan. They failed at the, "We're here. Now what?" portion.

Another war based on neocon lies. Some of us knew it at the time, but as usual, were drowned out by the Propaganda Media.

 

[QuadCityHawkeye1976]

I tell everyone I'm either a libertarian leaning republican or a republican leaning libertarian.

How many Dems have you voted for?

 

[seminole97]

I'm sorry you're seeing it that way. Maybe the issue isn't the "presence of the bases", but rather U.S. policy. Fix the policy, leave the bases.

‘Seeing it that way’?!
How are you seeing it, over the piles of corpses?
I’ve asked this open question before, what has been the benefit to Americans from the last 30 years of neocon foreign policy?
We’re much deeper in debt, with thousands killed and tens of thousands more injured physically and mentally. That’s not even touching the hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded foreigners, with millions displaced.
For what, exactly?
A much worse reputation globally than we enjoyed 30 years ago?
What has been the benefit if you’re not an arms manufacturer?

 

[seminole97]

Situational events that ebb and flow as conditions change. Strategic presence is critical to stabilize the region.

Our presence each time has been de-stabilizing. We ****ed up North Africa so bad with the regime change in Libya that it has bled into jihadist inspired violence across sub-Saharan Africa.

SECURITY FORCE ASSISTANCE IN AFRICA IS SHORING UP DICTATORSHIPS​

Link
The United States’ key partners in Africa are dictatorships

It hasn't been an issue of regime change.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and Yemen were ALL regime change efforts.
How’s that going? Give me your assessment of each one, I’m interested how a proponent of these stupid wars actually views the present day outcomes.
But you always bail when asked to explain the benefit, is this time different?

You continue to prove you have no concept of the U.S.'s role of free world leadership.

I don’t think killing hundreds of thousands of foreigners is the way the ‘leader of the free world’ should comport itself.
Hard to argue other nations shouldn’t invade and partition countries when we’ve spent the last three decades doing exactly that.
We back horrible dictatorships in the Middle East and Africa while you uncritically swallow pablum and propaganda about ‘leading the free world’.
Quit being a sucker and learn about what we’re actually doing backing these dictatorships and trying to partition other countries, destabilizing entire regions.

 

[seminole97]

If I want to hire an undocumented worker, so what?
If I want to rent rooms to an undocumented family, so what?

‘True’ libertarian would tell you that you have to dismantle the welfare state before opening the border.

Even Bernie understood open borders can’t work with a welfare state:

“If you open the borders, my God, there’s a lot of poverty in this world, and you’re going to have people from all over the world. And I don’t think that’s something that we can do at this point. Can’t do it. So that is not my position.”