Who Would Stephen Cox Kill?
Sep 14, 06 | 9:06 am by Joshua HolmesOver at LRC, yet another person has signed up to the anti-immigration platform. Prof. Cox goes on a long list of reasons to oppose immigration, most of which have already been torn apart on this very site. So let’s cut to the chase, Prof. Cox. You’re standing on the border. A family of Mexicans is running for the fence. You’ve got the rifle scope trained on a mother running with her son. Do you pull the trigger?
And if you can’t, are you really willing to “defend the borders”? Make no mistake about it, you’re going to have to kill people to keep them out of America. People want in.
So, Prof. Cox, who would you kill?
September 14th, 2006 at Sep 14, 06 | 12:01 pm
What’s wrong with just mining the border and putting up a big sign that says “Warning - Area Ahead is Mined” in spanish? That would solve the immigration problem and avoid the ethical difficulties of killing innocents.
September 14th, 2006 at Sep 14, 06 | 2:05 pm
If you own a section of land along this side of the border and post a “¡Peligro!” sign then, bombs away, old boy. (Just be careful the wheels don’t stray too far off your driveway when you park that RV for the winter)
By the same token, if I put a big welcome mat facing Mexico on my property, who is Stephen Cox to turn my guests away?
September 14th, 2006 at Sep 14, 06 | 3:38 pm
a long time ago some bad people wanted to protest lung. they were bolshviks with hairy armpits and beads and peace circles. they said lung was bad for children and other living things. they marched onto a lung silo complex and ran around pouring blood on things. blood is icky. a friendly little lung came up to them and politely asked them for a donut and some fake priest (he was really trotsky, lung thinks) dumped a bucket of blood on poor little lung.
no, lung doesn’t know what happened to the protestors after that, except that there was a lot more blood all of a sudden. maybe they left or fell down a big hole or took a swim in the big glowy pool at hanford (lung loves hanford) or maybe they fell into this machine lung got from her friend ted v. mikels. (bad people are always falling into that machine. it turns bones and flesh into screaming savage blood death! yay!) anyway, they all went away.
mexicans are nice! sometimes they give lung baggies full of rock salt as “border crossing fees” lung likes mexico! it is festive! (lung is not sure what to do with all the little baggies of rock salt, though.)
September 14th, 2006 at Sep 14, 06 | 4:49 pm
lung says:
But, sadly, they can’t be allowed to stay.
http://www.two–four.net/weblog.php?id=P2524
September 15th, 2006 at Sep 15, 06 | 4:52 pm
maybe bithead would like all the little baggies of rock salt. then he wouldn’t be so afraid of sudafed.
September 18th, 2006 at Sep 18, 06 | 4:34 pm
Surprise! Surprise! A LRC writer who is actually in favor of open immigration.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/vuk/vuk10.html
September 18th, 2006 at Sep 18, 06 | 5:49 pm
Note the author’s affiliation - Loyola University of New Orleans. I bet he’s Walter Block’s disciple. That only serves to strengthen my previous argument, that the only good that comes out of the Mises/LRA zoo comes from Block. Maybe more Misesians should move from AL to LA…
September 18th, 2006 at Sep 18, 06 | 7:16 pm
I’d prefer to characterize Vuk’s piece as being against government intervention.
September 29th, 2006 at Sep 29, 06 | 1:06 pm
Vuk make a good point: The problem is not open versus closed borders, the problem is socialism. Considerations of open borders, cultural inperialism, etc are just ways to divert your attention from the underlying cause leaving half of you hacking at the branches and the other half binding the cuts.