Thomas DiLorenzo writes on LRC about the curse of American nationalism, with reference to the recently published Volume 5 of Murray Rothbard’s Conceived in Liberty, transcribed from Rothbard’s handwritten notes and edited by Patrick Newman. DiLorenzo quotes Rothbard regarding the early American nationalists, such as “Alexander Hamilton, John Adams, Sam Adams, John Hancock, Thomas Paine…” who wanted to “destroy the original individualist and decentralized program of the American Revolution.” DiLorenzo writes that “Conceived in Liberty tells the story, chapter and verse, of how these men subverted and overthrew the principles of American freedom that inspired the American Revolution with their ‘devious and sinister machinations,'” as Rothbard would put it.
Now, I don’t know whether DiLorenzo agrees with me on the immigration issue. But that is one issue in which today’s nationalist conservatives go off the deep end, and abandon their supposed advocacy of private property and free markets in the name of American nationalism and their deeply indoctrinated worship of “America” with all the myths and glorification that go with it.
Today’s conservatives are supporters of centralization and government central planning in many aspects of life. And they love the tyrannical national security state. With the faux “war on terror” and the wars on drugs and immigration, today’s nationalist conservatives are police statists and militarists. Not big on individualism, decentralization or privatization, these people.
One of today’s extreme nationalists, Michelle Malkin, has been on the talk shows promoting her anti-immigration and “stand with ICE” tour and her book, Open Borders, Inc.
Stand with the police state, you mean. Certainly not stand with freedom, and the ideas of the Declaration of Independence, such as unalienable rights.
Now Malkin is being snubbed by conservative groups because of her defense of someone named Nick Fuentes who has been accused of being an anti-Semitic Holocaust denier and a racist. Malkin still insists on defending Fuentes, despite his controversies. I don’t know why. And her tour is now being banned by the intolerant academic fascists on the left, including the latest being Bentley College.
Malkin, and her anti-immigration cohorts Donald Trump, Ann Coulter et al. have this collectivist, nativist ideology that overrides whatever support they might ever have for the founding principles of America.
In fact, regarding the immigration issue, in one of the Founders’ complaints against the King in their Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote:
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
Do they know this? So, these so-called conservative people of today are really anti-free market, anti-private property and anti-freedom of association. As I wrote in this post summarizing several past posts on immigration, when you have genuine free markets people sell their labor or goods to employers or customers, and such contracts are between them and don’t involve third parties unless specifically noted. And in a society of freedom and free markets people come and go as they please. No police state at the border, no having to report to government bureaucrats. As I wrote in that post, statists look to the ruling government bureaucrats for validation.
In contrast to the free society, if you favor the current system that consists of workers and employers having to get the government’s permission to do business or trade, then that is socialism, not capitalism and not freedom. Private property rights are such that an individual owns his own labor and sells it to an employer in a voluntary contract. When you have to get a third party’s permission or ultimate authorization in these things, then the real owner is that third party, not the laborer or employer. In the current system of government ownership of the people and “their” property, that third party owner is the U.S. government.
There are a lot of myths thrown around in the immigration debate, and one of them asserts or implies some kind of collective ownership of the U.S. territory as a whole, but there is no such collective ownership. If so, then such an arrangement overrides private property rights.
Once again I ask, why aren’t these so-called conservatives spending their time and activism on getting rid of the welfare state if they’re worried about “illegals” coming and getting on welfare? Because they LOVE the welfare state! They love Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Otherwise they would constantly advocate those socialist programs be abolished.
But there shouldn’t be government confiscation of private wealth or earnings — that’s criminal. There shouldn’t be government-imposed redistribution in any case, whether redistributed to other people here or to foreigners. Those schemes are immoral, illegitimate, and criminal, in my view.
And why are today’s conservatives so short-sighted, like the ones on the left? They don’t seem to want to address the causes of the “illegals” and the caravans coming up from the southern border. Such causes include U.S. government’s foreign interventions and foreign aid to corrupt regimes in Central America, and the “war on drugs.” The immigrants are fleeing because of the violence as consequences of drug prohibition. But sadly, many of today’s conservatives support the drug war and the nanny state in which we must turn to gubmint to tell us what we may or may not consume in our “own” bodies. Today’s conservatives support siccing the goon government police on innocent, peaceful people who haven’t harmed anyone, just as is the case with immigrants. It is the goons of ICE, that Michelle Malkin et al. love so much, who are the thugs.
And given that many more violent crimes are committed here by U.S. citizens than by immigrants, the fact that these “conservatives” spend so much time and activism only concentrating on the unauthorized entrants to the territory, then that tells me that it’s not about crime, it’s not about “stealing Americans’ jobs,” it’s not about welfare, it’s all about foreigner hating, and that’s it. It’s about collectivist nativism, and envy and covetousness as well, very much like that of the left.
If today’s conservatives such as Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh and all the ditto-heads really favored the principles of America’s founding, they would promote unrestricted free markets, protection of private property, decentralization and abolishing of the police state.