From https://www.lp.org/platform:
>we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
>We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression.
It also goes without saying, that abolishing welfare would keep out most economic migrants.
>>55877520
>control
>libertarian
>>55877602
it's straight from the website of the american libertarian party. you seem to be confusing them with anarcho-capitalists
>>55877646 (Me)
and even in an ancap society there would probably be borders, they'd just be protected by private contractors and not a state
>>55877520
you didn't post the entire paragraph
> We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
>Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders
they are already being wishy washy by saying economic freedom demands unrestricted movement but in the next sentence support control.
Which is it?
>>55877793
>Which is it?
it's a balance of the two, naturally
>>55877520
If we didn't have welfare and we didn't stoke the fires around the world, people could immigrate freely to our country like they did before the wars
>>55877520
Do they support the right to discriminate?
>>55877863
i think so, as long as physical violence isn't involved. freedom of expression is central, at least
>>55877793
It would mean that people can come and go freely but some people, i.e. terrorists, will get arrested if they try to cross
>>55877955
you run into an issue of dictating policy wise who is a potential terrorist and who is not. you can look at the no-fly list for how well this works in practice.
>>55878024
>you can look at the no-fly list for how well this works in practice.
what are the problems with the no-fly list, specifically?
>>55878636
As a screening tool it is ineffective and has more false positives than actual terrorists on the list. It also tends to have journalists mysteriously appear on it with zero connection to terrorism.
>>55878769
so what solution would you suggest? stopping all traffic? allowing everyone in?
>>55877793
>what is a distinction
further OP is a faggot and should not use the libertarian political party platform to represent libertarian philosophy
half the people in that party are dejected liberals with the notion that NAP=unrestricted everything
borders and strict border control can be derived from a nation perspective to property rights
after all, if the people are "forced by necessity" to social contracts, should they not have a say over who their fellow citizens are
the idea of closed borders is much easier to defend ideologically and libertarians shouldn't split over it
Further, this is a moot point now when the damage has already been done
>>55878844
Not entrusting it to the TSA and leaving it to agencies with more expertise in that area.
Can't really give you a solid answer that would 100% prevent it since "terrorist" is a broad and politicized term.
One of the core tenets of libertarianism is to have big daddy guburmunt to protect the american workers & proletariat ! How dare an immigrant makes a private contact with a business owner and rents a house and work in another country while paying taxes. No ! that would only decrease the labor prices down and would invite shitskins.
Everyone knows that national socialist I mean sorry the libertarian party must preserve the ethnic homogeneity of the country and protect the working class rights
>>55879527
very funny. just because libertarians don't advocate complete elimination of the state, that doesn't mean they don't advocate freedom
>>55879635
freedom for the working class to enjoy higher wages ofc, sadly libertarians hate the rich and do not give them the freedom to invite foreign workers to work under them. How dare they import cheap labor without the blessing and permission of the guburmunt
fucking libertarians always hating on the rich
>>55879402
sounds good, but does that have anything to do with libertarianism?
>>55880441
No but you asked so I answered. It has nothing to do with libertarianism.
