I thank Jacob Hornberger for making my case regarding borders and property – and, therefore, immigration.
Wedding Cakes Have Nothing to Do With Free Speech. In this piece, Hornberger makes an exemplary argument – perfectly libertarian – on this issue of baking wedding cakes for gay couples, etc. It isn’t a free speech issue – which is how most people argue it; it is a private property issue.
The fact is that the wedding cake controversy has nothing to do with free speech. Instead, the issue is all about private property and the right to discriminate.
Exactly. Now, some background…
My Case Regarding Borders
I am 100% certain that the issue of borders and immigration in a world of state borders cannot be answered solely via the non-aggression principle.
One has a right to exit; one does not have a right to enter. This is consistent with a private property order. In a pure private property order, every border would be closed – or, more precisely, managed. It would be managed by the property owner.
I am not saying yes or no; I am not agreeing or disagreeing with one side or the other; I certainly do not agree with many of the methods deployed by the state. I only state that there is no answer to be derived solely from the NAP in a world of state borders.
I will explain…again. For the anarchists out there: from the non-aggression principle completely applied, one cannot derive a state. Therefore, what can the non-aggression principle suggest about state borders? I suggest…nothing.
Walter Block (who favors open borders) says as much. While he states, rightly, that on topics such as drug use, slavery, etc., the state need only do one thing – that is, eliminate…