Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise

One of the rationalizations used by advocates of government action vis-a-vis the recent batch of "invaders" (e.g. Honduran kids), has been the defense of our culture. It's funny though, because when I examine the culture that is being defended, it doesn't seem to be my culture.

For one thing, the culture being defended is, in part, socialism. Now, while I doubt that many get worked up over brown people picking strawberries out in a field, the picture invariably painted is of them getting "free shit" like hospital visits and government schooling and food stamps and such. I agree that socialism cannot work very well when unlimited numbers of people try to get that free shit. The only way it can work at all (assuming for the purposes of argument that it can) is by having enough victims to loot, and by limiting the numbers of recipients of that stolen loot. So, the "fence 'em out" crowd wants "socialism for me, but not for thee". That is not defending my culture, though. My culture is, among other things, "kill socialism". I don't think it's good for me or for thee.

It's particularly amusing that the brown people are described as being more socialist-leaning, politically, than the average American, since what is being advocated by the "fence 'em out" crowd, is keeping our home-grown American socialism healthy. So, the brown people will make the USSA lean more to the left? Don't make me laugh. Dudes, we are already there. Even so-called libertarians and so-called conservatives work to preserve it.

In another amusing inconsistency, the "fence 'em out" crowd often expresses a veneration of the ways and attitudes of the Founders. They make an exception for immigration, though, as the Founders didn't have such laws (with the notable exception of the Alien Acts, directed at those dastardly French, which bounced the Federalists out of power forever). There were no fences around America back then. Fences are not for free people.

Another thing that gets their panties in a bind is that these brown people break laws, laws against travelling where they please. Now, everybody makes a show of sneering at mala prohibita laws— but for the ones they prefer! I guess libertarians are as good at cherry-picking as everybody else. But this is not defending my culture, either. My culture is that laws are petty dictates written by scum and enforced by thugs. I like it when people break mala prohibita laws; they are my kind of people. Too bad more "real Americans" don't do the same, because obedience is an attribute of slaves. When I cite Jefferson* or Heinlein** on the subject of law, strangely enough, I actually mean it. I don't cross my fingers behind my back and whisper to myself, "... except for immigration."

Another thing that bothers the "fence 'em out" crowd is melanin. I guess in the old days it would have been Catholicism, but they seem to be (mostly) over that and just don't like seeing too many brown people, or too many people speaking something other than English. But they are not defending my culture this way either. I like to meet and know a variety of people from around the Earth, because they have interesting stories. Hearing a conversation conducted in Spanish does not rile me.

The "fence 'em out" crowd also has a lust for incarceration, police, bureaucratic procedures (of the immigration "service"), quotas, national ID's, and government permission slips for work. They certainly do not defend my culture in these ways. I think we have more than enough people incarcerated already. I don't like roadblocks and interrogations by uniformed thugs. I can't imagine why anyone would like those things.

Yet another fad of the "fence 'em out" crowd is collectivism. You will daily hear tales of brown people as disease vectors, or gang members, or Aztlan flag-wavers, or welfare queens. The talking points flow straight from the Ministry of Propaganda into the hater's brains, and from there to their mouths. Never will you hear brown people described as individuals. This does not defend my culture, sorry. I am not a collectivist. In fact I wrote a little article aiming to help people not be collectivists, here. I wish folks would take a look and give it a try.

Another passion of the "fence 'em out" crowd is fear. Being fearful of Honduran kids, seriously? That's even more absurd than being fearful of terrorists (other than those of our own government, anyway). One of these days the ruling class may institute a campaign, seeing if they can get people to become fearful of Pez, just for laughs. I try not to be too driven by fear; it's not part of my culture, anyway. I think bravery is a better trait to cultivate.

It looks to me that the culture being protected here, is the neocon culture, or maybe fascism. Or xenophobia—who knows. Anyway I am none of these. Somebody else's culture is being protected, not mine; so I don't want to hear any more nonsense about protecting culture. The only culture government protects is plunder, power lust and slavery—the ruling class culture. People ought to stop looking to their slavemasters (who don't give a rat's ass about it) to protect theirs.

I want to qualify all the above with a statement of tolerance. I don't actually mind socialism per se, nor fascism nor xenophobia nor collectivism—as long as I am left alone by their proponents. Well, I do mind them, and find them ugly, but I can tolerate them, because I am an advocate of political tolerance AKA Panarchy. But the point of the article still applies. My culture is not being protected by the "fence 'em out" crowd. If I could blow up every immigration checkpoint in the world, letting people travel freely, letting the free market work, I would do it. I don't fear liberty. Instead, I am concerned about the lack of it.

I hope El Neil is doing better these days.