Search the Community

Let's focus on the difference between border screening and border control. I'm not going to entertain Binswanger's open borders position here. I did that on another thread. Here I invite DonAthos (and others) to present their border screening position, and we can respectfully debate the issue. I'll offer my view supporting principled border control. My position, in a nutshell, is that the government of a nation has the absolute right to control its borders. Much of my argument is based on a disagreement I have with Rand over the existence of public property. I presented my case here. I su

An immigrant to the United States from Uzbekistan who arrived here in 2010 has committed an act of mass murder in New York, killing 8 people along a bike path and shouting "allahu akbar." https://t.co/sQtoZFLdeG

Objectivist Ed Powell has written a paper against the open borders immigration position of other Objectivists (Binswanger, Tracinski, Biddle, Bernstein, Duke). This raises the question: Does a foreigner have a right to cross an international border? Powell says no. Powell says the burden of proof that any applicant for entry is not a threat to the freedom or security of the country lies with the applicant. The paper is well written, the position well argued. For reference: Binswanger's essay and Biddle's essay

Hi everyone. I haven't been an active poster on this forum since I was younger, but I thought that I could tell everyone about my Objectivist oriented immigration FB page. I started this page because I think that the uniquely Objectivist viewpoint of individualism is missing from immigration discussion. To use some typical examples, the Left talks about some mushy notion of "love" as though it's a winning immigration argument, while the Right talks about "American Jobs" and deterministic qualities like voting demographics and I.Q. tests. If you agree with me that the individual needs more cons

Immigration is generally beneficial. It usually adds to a nation's economic wealth and military strength, and even to its intellectual power and cultural riches. Unfortunately, everyone in the world today lives in a Welfare State. This is a kind of 'moderate', collectivist tyranny, which could also be described as semi-lawlessness, featuring a permanent civil war between residents, or a Hobbesian "war of all against all". Theft from, and coercion of, one's neighbors is rampant. Big Brother is everywhere nowadays. So it matters how predatory and efficaciously warlike any potential new i

Does anybody have any opinions on the ruling? My own summary of the underlying premises of the reactions to it is this: Bad and wrong: discriminating against people based on their ethnicity they did not choose. Prudent and correct: discriminating against people based on their place of birth they did not choose. But I must admit I didn't get into much depth on it. Did anybody here?

I have an immigrant friend who is in the USA on a student visa, and she would like to find a way to work in the USA legally, but her school does not offer this type of service. She says she has found an agency that can help, but says it would cost her a thousand dollars (which makes it seem non-legitimate to me). Any advise you immigrant lawyer types can direct me to? I've looked it up on the web and all I get are official government sites that say work through your school. Is there an agency that can help her out without it costing her an arm and a leg? Thank in advance! I certainly think