Harry Binswanger on Open Immigration

[Francisco Ferrer]

Great, but what's the difference between imposing "proper values" on the young (through approved state curricula) and on new residents from across the border? We gotta make sure aliens don't commit crimes, right? Ditto, it would seem, new arrivals via procreation.

[Brant Gaede]

Great, but what's the difference between imposing "proper values" on the young (through approved state curricula) and on new residents from across the border? We gotta make sure aliens don't commit crimes, right? Ditto, it would seem, new arrivals via procreation.

If you want to impose the practical as opposed to the educating theorectical for the practical folk to foundationally use, then please stop having a cow because it's always gonna be messy there. Hands get dirty. People get hurt. That's the essential nature of change even in purely private economic matters. Nothing is guaranteed and nothing lasts, at least above the atomic level. What kind of changes do you want to effect--for you? Your life, your family, your community, your country, your world. What's possible? What's practical? What's desirable? Greg, the "moralist," the irrationalist with whom you incessantly argue to no effect on him, natch, has got his approach, or lack of it, all down to a T figured out. It works for him, so far it seems. To that extent he's rational for he learned to stop bumping into things and to throw an aggravating rationalistic veneer over it all. His hands are clean.(?)

--Brant

[Francisco Ferrer]

In the interest of not having cows, let us stipulate--calmly, very calmly--that it is appropriate for the federal government to determine how many new people we have in this country.

Then it is only a question of what criterion--if any--the government will use to decide precisely what kind of new people become residents. If there is to be a cultural or values criterion, is it not reasonable to ask what that would be?

[anthony]

At risk of treading on toes, I am unsure if it is present day USA, or a laissez-faire future being discussed. If the first, then it seems to me such principles as freedom of movement are so compromised that policies almost go in reverse - in L-F, I think no government has the right to apply any "filters", in or out.

Ever been to a container depot at a port, gents? There is vastly more and easier access for anything potentially harmful there, than whatever a new immigrant can carry in or on his person.

[Brant Gaede]

At risk of treading on toes, I am unsure if it is present day USA, or a laissez-faire future being discussed. If the first, then it seems to me such principles as freedom of movement are so compromised that policies almost go in reverse - in L-F, I think no government has the right to apply any "filters", in or out.

Ever been to a container depot at a port, gents? There is vastly more and easier access for anything potentially harmful there, than whatever a new immigrant can carry in or on his person.

And just what do you imagine such stuff might be?

--Brant

[Brant Gaede]

In the interest of not having cows, let us stipulate--calmly, very calmly--that it is appropriate for the federal government to determine

how many new people we have in this country.

Then it is only a question of what criterion--if any--the government will use to decide precisely what kind of new people become residents. If there is to be a cultural or values criterion, is it not reasonable to ask what that would be?

No, no, no and again no. You are trapped in the contradiction of utopian thinking or--in a perfect world what would be perfection? Back at the ranch, what are we to do about x problem right now? Does moving in the direction of more freedom possible and if so, how? If not, why? If the government determines, that isn't freedom. That is inappropriate. But it does. That is what is to be chewed on. To dismantle such a statist construct requires expertly removing brick after brick over a long period of time. Other statist constructs can be dealt with more readily and quickly. The right-now problem is illegal children flooding over the border thanks to the collusion of the current administration and Mexico. This needs to be stopped by Mexico at its own southern border. The children already here can be dealt with more generously, but this sudden manifestation of immigration needs to be spiked immediately. Then the problem remaining can be identified and dealt with in a more theorectical way and dealt with on the practical level. I have some tentative ideas but they all leave me swimming in statism even if I'm heading for the shores of liberty. We are all swimming in statism right now, but we are entitled not to drown in it. It's not that we didn't consent to our government, but that we didn't consent to let our government kill us. Think of a man shot in the chest getting surgery to save his life. The surgeon visits more trauma on the man to do that. You may actually need to accept less freedom to get more freedom. That surgeon is not operating on a man who wasn't shot pretending he had been. In the first case he is being supremely moral. In the second case, supremely immoral. We might also call all this using the ethics of emergency.

--Brant

messy, messy, messy

[Francisco Ferrer]

"The present state of our culture may be gauged by the extent to which principles have vanished from public discussion, reducing our cultural atmosphere to the sordid, petty senselessness of a bickering family that haggles over trivial concretes, while betraying all its major values, selling out its future for some spurious advantage of the moment." --Ayn Rand

Let's look at another area, neighborhood law enforcement. I know very well that "it's always gonna be messy there. Hands get dirty. People get hurt." I also know that if one approaches the subject with the idea that theory, standards, principles, laws, and rules represent "utopian thinking," then one practically guarantees the messiest of results. Setting goals does not result in perfect justice. But it does minimize the likelihood of total government-imposed chaos. For examples of such a state, see this and many other websites.

"Back at the ranch, what are we to do about x problem right now?"

Well, we can throw our hands up and say we have to have less freedom before we get more freedom. But I'm not content to let Obama and Company determine how much less freedom I need.

I would rather make up my own mind about that. And having a discussion among other intelligent people is a part of that process.

[anthony]

At risk of treading on toes, I am unsure if it is present day USA, or a laissez-faire future being discussed. If the first, then it seems to me such principles as freedom of movement are so compromised that policies almost go in reverse - in L-F, I think no government has the right to apply any "filters", in or out.

Ever been to a container depot at a port, gents? There is vastly more and easier access for anything potentially harmful there, than whatever a new immigrant can carry in or on his person.

And just what do you imagine such stuff might be?

--Brant

Vaccination was mentioned.

[Brant Gaede]

Vaccination was mentioned.

That's not what's about those containers.

--Brant

[Neil Parille]

There is no more authority to demand papers at the border than there is for the police to board a city bus and demand papers of everyone on it. A man, citizen or non-citizen, is to be presumed innocent. He does not have to satisfy the government that he is not a criminal, in the absence of any evidence that he is.

At the nation's borders, instead of "inspection," there should simply be a sign: "Welcome to America."

--Harry Binswanger

Consider what would happen. Mexico has a population of around 120 million. I saw a pole recently that said something like 35% of Mexicans would come to the US if they could. The numbers for other Central American nations are as high. Even the legitimate functions of government would be overwhelmed.

Binswanger says he's against anarcho-capitalism, but it seems to me that open immigration of his variety would lead to something like that.

They [immigrants] are willing to cast aside the tradition-bound roles assigned to them in their native lands and to re-define themselves as Americans. These are the people our country needs in order to keep alive the individualist, hard-working attitude that made America.

Here is a short list of some great immigrants: Alexander Hamilton, Alexander Graham Bell, Andrew Carnegie, most of the top scientists of the Manhattan Project, Igor Sikorsky (the inventor of the helicopter), Google co-founder Sergey Brin, Ayn Rand.

There are 2 billion Moslems in the world and they have produced 2 Nobel prize winners in the hard sciences. That's the same number as Luxembourg (population 500,000). The idea that the US is being held back by not having unlimited immigration is rather silly.

-Neil Parille

[Brant Gaede]

There are 113,000,000 Mexicans and 1.6 billion Muslims (13% in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country) according to Wikipedia. One quarter of the earth's population.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

There are 2 billion Moslems in the world and they have produced 2 Nobel prize winners in the hard sciences. That's the same number as Luxembourg (population 500,000). The idea that the US is being held back by not having unlimited immigration is rather silly.

-Neil Parille

It all depends on the quality of the immigrant.

The crew at Los Alamos, the chief and best physicists and engineers were either immigrants or the children of immigrants.

There is a joke: One reason why the U.S. got the A-bomb before Germany (which started on making one three years before the U.S. did) was that our Jewish physicists were better than Werner Heisenberg's Jewish physicists.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Wolf DeVoon]

Private property argument against open immigration

https://web.archive.org/web/20020610193306/http://www.zolatimes.com/V5.43/immigration.html

I've argued for public roads and rights-of-way, to get from Point A to Point B unhindered

but the right to roam ends at your neighbor's driveway, hedge, and/or fence line.

[Neil Parille]

Mark from ARI watch has written an excellent examination of the ARI and Binswanger immigration position.

http://ariwatch.com/OpenBordersAndIndividualRights.htm

-NP

[Brant Gaede]

How is Binswanger an ARI writer?

Nevertheless the supposed existence of a perfect government and society and one and all around the world sharing the same American values could make his car go. I'd agree with this if every square foot of land in this country were privately owned and immigrants would need the permission of the property owner to set foot on it. All the closed and restricted borders are is the prevention of trespassing by the federal property owners.

What's with this big essay? I just did it with a short paragraph. Why is anybody even watching these intellectual putzes?

--Brant (the grinder-downer)

[Selene]

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/01/22/measles-outbreak-that-started-in-california-expanding/

[Backlighting]

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/01/22/measles-outbreak-that-started-in-california-expanding/

Think I'll speak with my primary doc about getting a booster.

That measles is nasty stuff.

-J

[Selene]

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/01/22/measles-outbreak-that-started-in-california-expanding/

Think I'll speak with my primary doc about getting a booster.

That measles is nasty stuff.

-J

Agreed and that is just the tip of the iceberg in the germ warfare invasion.

[Brant Gaede]

Measles is worse in adults than children. If you have it as a child it provides protection to you the adult. Less childhood measles means less adult exposure to children with measles causes more shingles for adults. I believe the manufacturer of the shingles vaccine also makes the measles vaccine. While childhood measles is generally no big deal, I don't know how bad the bad exceptions are.

--Brant

[Backlighting]

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/01/22/measles-outbreak-that-started-in-california-expanding/

Think I'll speak with my primary doc about getting a booster.

That measles is nasty stuff.

-J

Agreed and that is just the tip of the iceberg in the germ warfare invasion.

The enemy also resides in one's stomach. Taking a probiotic daily helps defeat the enemy down there.

-J

[Selene]

Measles is worse in adults than children. If you have it as a child it provides protection to you the adult. Less childhood measles means less adult exposure to children with measles causes more shingles for adults. I believe the manufacturer of the shingles vaccine also makes the measles vaccine. While childhood measles is generally no big deal, I don't know how bad the bad exceptions are.

--Brant

Seems to be spreading in Arizona...and apparently, it is being linked to the Disneyland cases...

Both of the cases confirmed Tuesday — a man in Pinal County and a woman in Phoenix — were linked to a family of four whose measles cases were confirmed last week following travel to Disneyland in California.

The outbreak of measles has reached "a critical point," according to Will Humble, director of the Arizona Department of Health Services. The outbreak has the potential to be far worse than the state's last measles outbreak in 2008, he said.

Humble said the number of cases will "absolutely" continue to grow.

"I am certain we will have more just based on the sheer number of people exposed this time," he said.

Health officials believe the Phoenix-area woman recently diagnosed with measles may have exposed as many as 195 children to the disease at the Phoenix Children's East Valley Center on Jan. 20 and 21.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/01/28/arizona-measles-disneyland-outbreak-phoenix-children/22452491/

[Brant Gaede]

I made a mistake. It's chickenpox that leaves the old adult vulnerable to shingles, not measles.

--Brant

[Selene]

Let's see if they can blame this on "Climate Change."

''Measles anxiety rippled thousands of miles beyond its center on Friday as officials scrambled to try to contain a wider spread of the highly contagious disease — which America declared vanquished 15 years ago, before a statistically significant number of parents started refusing to vaccinate their children."

The NY Times used the George Carlin argument...

But here in California, anti-vaccine parents whose children have endured bouts of whooping cough and chickenpox largely defended their choice to raise their children on natural foods, essential oils and no vaccinations.

“There is absolutely no reason to get the shot,” said Crystal McDonald, whose 16-year-old daughter was one of 66 students sent home from Palm Desert High School for the next two weeks because they did not have full measles immunizations.

The mother and her husband, approached the decision rationally. They, as parents, chose. The state has no interest here, without making a prima facie case that there is a verifiable threat to the general poplulation of citizens, e.g., Typhoid Mary, or, the mentally, e.g., progressives.

After researching the issue and reading information from a national anti-vaccine advocacy group, Ms. McDonald said she and her husband, a chiropractor, decided to raise their four children without vaccines. She said they ate well and had never been to the doctor, and she insisted that her daughter was healthier than many classmates. But when the school sent her home with a letter, Ms. McDonald’s daughter was so concerned about missing two weeks of advanced-placement classes that she suggested simply getting a measles inoculation.

The NY Times then tries to commit the act of journalism explaining that:

The anti-vaccine movement can largely be traced to a 1998 report in a medical journal that suggested a link between vaccines and autism but was later proved fraudulent and retracted. Today, the waves of parents who shun vaccines include some who still believe in the link and some, like the Amish, who have religious objections to vaccines. Then there is a particular subculture of largely wealthy and well-educated families, many living in palmy enclaves around Los Angeles and San Francisco, who are trying to carve out “all-natural” lives for their children

I was not aware of this study, nor that, as the NY Times alleges, that the study was "retracted."

I question a lot of the NY Times "facts."

The people most at risk of becoming seriously ill are babies too young to be vaccinated and the immunologically frail; measles can transform into something much worse, like encephalitis, and can be deadly. Among the fully vaccinated, the chances of contracting measles are small but do exist; the C.D.C. says the vaccine is more than 95 percent effective.

I am also suspicious of government "centers," "departments" and "studies," particularly because there is clear and convincing evidence of that fact.

The article turns to the local Arizona situation with a linkage to Disney...

Similar scares are playing out far from Disneyland. In Kearny, Ariz., a small rural community with an economy tied to a nearby copper mine, a single family’s Christmas vacation has upended the rhythms of daily life. The family visited Disneyland in December, and four of its unvaccinated members came back with measles; a fifth person in Kearny also contracted the disease.
Continue reading the main story

Now, many businesses in town — the grocery store, the post office, and more — have measles alerts in the windows featuring a blond boy with a rash all over his face. Several signs say that someone with the measles was in the store at a specific time last week and advise others who were there at the same time to be alert to symptoms.

Some parents in Kearny are sympathetic to the family that did not vaccinate children.

The fact that the NY Times "reporter" selected this next quote is quite revealing:

“A lot of people here have personal beliefs that are faith based,” said John Carroll, the school superintendent, who sent a letter home to parents last week encouraging them to vaccinate their children. The faith, Mr. Carroll said, is not so much religious as it is a belief that “they raise their children in a natural, organic environment” and are suspicious of pharmaceutical companies and big business.

The local education Commissar never thinks that Government is the one common denominator in all those linkages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/31/us/vaccine-critics-turn-defensive-over-measles.html?emc=edit_th_20150131&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=53564225&_r=1

A...

[Jules Troy]

Future Darwin awards in the making. Will these same people refuse an Ebola vaccine if there is an outbreak?

[william.scherk]

Let's see if they can blame this on "Climate Change."

''Measles anxiety rippled thousands of miles beyond its center on Friday as officials scrambled to try to contain a wider spread of the highly contagious disease — which America declared vanquished 15 years ago, before a statistically significant number of parents started refusing to vaccinate their children."

The NY Times used the George Carlin argument...

What's the George Carlin argument in this context?

But here in California, anti-vaccine parents whose children have endured bouts of whooping cough and chickenpox largely defended their choice to raise their children on natural foods, essential oils and no vaccinations.

“There is absolutely no reason to get the shot,” said Crystal McDonald, whose 16-year-old daughter was one of 66 students sent home from Palm Desert High School for the next two weeks because they did not have full measles immunizations.

The mother and her husband, approached the decision rationally. They, as parents, chose. The state has no interest here, without making a prima facie case that there is a verifiable threat to the general poplulation of citizens, e.g., Typhoid Mary, or, the mentally, e.g., progressives.

Perhaps the mother and her husband approached vaccination rationally, perhaps they didn't. You haven't laid out the steps of rational decision-making they undertook.

On the other topic, your opinion may be rooted in a general discomfort with or rejection of policies and practices under the rubric "Public Health." Any authorities charged with the Public Health file might be suspect, on political grounds ('there should be no public health bodies' enforcing any kind of vaccination schedule. 'Public Health' is apposite to my ideas about unfettered capitalism and the paramount importance of individual liberty").

I can understand this stance -- it is a fairly standard drawing from Objectivism. I'd point out that in some cases -- biological warfare, for example -- the 'public health' aspect of a government response or readiness to such warfare is subsumed under the military. Perhaps we could have a good argument about more borderline-ish issues like public water treatment standards, what is public and what is private water, whether a government or private national management of 'health' could be stripped back to the bones, or divested, or delegislated.

So we could argue about assessing threats from biological agents, monitoring, mitigation, and countermeasure, and maybe agree that some form of quasi-military voluntary preparedness, responsiveness, would be licit under Objectivism. Separately, we could argue about whether a public or private school should be free to bar an unvaccinated student during an outbreak.

I have a disdain from the out-there anti-vax maniacs. I spent a summer investigating the local movement. It felt like a cousin to a cult. The conference I went to was charged with emotion, like a revival meeting, a mini-crusade against the enemy.

What made it feel most like a cult was a persistent disconnect from reality, avoidance of reality-checks, internal fact-checking, the doggedly irrational basis of passionate beliefs.

I'd seen this eerie disconnected passion in earlier investigations of the rumour panic around Satanic Ritual Abuse. The same estimation of evil, the same ability to believe in preposterous plots, the same incorrigible insistence that the plots were utterly real in face of compelling counter-evidence. I think this sink of irrationality is always present in society to some degree. The SRA flap was a hundred times more awful, like a flare-up of witch-hunting. The witches in this instance are not the kind who take bloody sexual sacrifices for the devil, but the much lesser kind that prick our babies with poison.

After researching the issue and reading information from a national anti-vaccine advocacy group, Ms. McDonald said she and her husband, a chiropractor, decided to raise their four children without vaccines. She said they ate well and had never been to the doctor, and she insisted that her daughter was healthier than many classmates. But when the school sent her home with a letter, Ms. McDonald’s daughter was so concerned about missing two weeks of advanced-placement classes that she suggested simply getting a measles inoculation.

The NY Times then tries to commit the act of journalism explaining that:

The anti-vaccine movement can largely be traced to a 1998 report in a medical journal that suggested a link between vaccines and autism but was later proved fraudulent and retracted. Today, the waves of parents who shun vaccines include some who still believe in the link and some, like the Amish, who have religious objections to vaccines. Then there is a particular subculture of largely wealthy and well-educated families, many living in palmy enclaves around Los Angeles and San Francisco, who are trying to carve out “all-natural” lives for their children

I was not aware of this study, nor that, as the NY Times alleges, that the study was "retracted."

I think you may have just forgotten the study and its retraction, since the reporters did not mention the details. This is the famous Andrew Wakefield MMR vaccine 'study' published in The Lancet.

The NYT report could have added that information easily. Forced us to google "fraudulent link medical journal retracted autism vaccines." the bastards. ** [EDIT to add: I didn't know till I looked, but the NYT article included a link on the text bolded above, to an earlier NYT story "British Journal Retracts Paper Linking Autism and Vaccines." Slug line was 'The paper in The Lancet, which was retracted after years of reassessment, caused a sharp decline in vaccinations in Britain after its publication]

I question a lot of the NY Times "facts."

The people most at risk of becoming seriously ill are babies too young to be vaccinated and the immunologically frail; measles can transform into something much worse, like encephalitis, and can be deadly. Among the fully vaccinated, the chances of contracting measles are small but do exist; the C.D.C. says the vaccine is more than 95 percent effective.

I am also suspicious of government "centers," "departments" and "studies," particularly because there is clear and convincing evidence of that fact.

Specifically on the subject of measles, do you know otherwise? I mean, do you know better (than say the Centers for Disease Control)? Is it that you dispute who is most at risk of becoming seriously ill if infected with measles? Or do you dispute the notion that the measles vaccine is more than 95 percent effective?

The article turns to the local Arizona situation with a linkage to Disney...

Similar scares are playing out far from Disneyland. In Kearny, Ariz., a small rural community with an economy tied to a nearby copper mine, a single family’s Christmas vacation has upended the rhythms of daily life. The family visited Disneyland in December, and four of its unvaccinated members came back with measles; a fifth person in Kearny also contracted the disease.

Now, many businesses in town — the grocery store, the post office, and more — have measles alerts in the windows featuring a blond boy with a rash all over his face. Several signs say that someone with the measles was in the store at a specific time last week and advise others who were there at the same time to be alert to symptoms.

Some parents in Kearny are sympathetic to the family that did not vaccinate children.

The fact that the NY Times "reporter" selected this next quote is quite revealing:

“A lot of people here have personal beliefs that are faith based,” said John Carroll, the school superintendent, who sent a letter home to parents last week encouraging them to vaccinate their children. The faith, Mr. Carroll said, is not so much religious as it is a belief that “they raise their children in a natural, organic environment” and are suspicious of pharmaceutical companies and big business.

The local education Commissar never thinks that Government is the one common denominator in all those linkages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/31/us/vaccine-critics-turn-defensive-over-measles.html?emc=edit_th_20150131&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=53564225&_r=1

-- what do you mean by 'all those linkages'? The Commissar's words about 'faith' were I thought spot on. Few if any religious objections to vaccination are cited by the so-called 'antivaxxers' ... the objections are found in deeply-felt but mistaken beliefs and fears.

__________________________________

**

Edited February 1, 2015 by william.scherk