Liberty and Immigration; T. E. Woods, Jr.

THEFREEMAN IDEASON UBERTY Libertyand Immigration by Thomas E. Woods, Jr. T he extraordinarily high rate of immigra tion, legal and illegal, into the United States is an indication that our country is doing something right. The United States, while far from boasting a pure free market, clearly offers enough economic liberty to attract the migration of peoples from all over the world. Currently, half the world's im migrants come to the United States. Libertarians have generally welcomed immigration, and on very simple grounds. According to the "non-aggression axiom," it is wrong to aggress against the person or property of anyone who has not himself committed such aggression. To restrict the free movement of peoples across borders is thus to engage in unjustified aggression, and is therefore anathema. Upon further reflection, however, it is puzzling why so many libertarians have so enthusiastically and uncritically accepted the "open borders" position. It leads, in fact, to an infringement on the property rights of millions of homeowners, and a tremendous increase in state power.

In a 1993 address before the Mont Pelerin Society, the late Murray N. Rothbard sug gested an alternative libertarian approach to immigration. Imagine the pure private property, or "anarcho-capitalist" model, in which all property, from streets to parks, is privately owned. There is no such thing Mr. Woods, a doctoral candida.te in American history at Columbia University, was a summer fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama. as a "public space" under such an arrange ment, and therefore no "immigration prob lem." Individual property owners or con tractual communities would be able to set their own immigration policy, and deter mine for themselves who would or would not be allowed to enter their private prop erty.I The situation becomes muddied when we insert public property into the equation. Cultural cohesion is a value cherished by many, but it is gravely compromised by distant levels of government which force localities to allow "universal access" to local public property. It is hopelessly mis leading to describe this state-enforced pol icy as "free immigration"; rather, as the libertarian philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe points out, it is a flagrant case of "forced integration.,,2 Libertarians and Public Property The issue boils down to how libertarians should think about public property. Some libertarians hold that as long as a road or any other property is public, no restrictions can be placed on its use. If a nudist colony decided to march, au naturel, down the middle of a well-traveled area of Manhattan, such a libertarian would have no objection.

(That chastened New Yorkers would be unlikely to notice is another matter.) Clearly, no private road proprietor would dream of subjecting his patrons to such an 775 776 THE FREEMAN • DECEMBER 1995 environment. But until all roads are pri vate-a situation unlikely to obtain anytime soon-on what grounds should the most basic civilizational norms not be observed on public property? There is no reason why the mass of the public, already looted and oppressed by the state, should also be forced to endure offensive behavior or dreadful squalor every time they set foot on state-owned property. 3 The same analysis can be applied to immigration policy. Must people be forced to surrender to the state-imposed multicul turalism that is current immigration policy, or can they at least attempt to approximate the demographic patterns that would obtain under private-property conditions? It is hardly unwarranted to assume that the vast majority of Americans, if control over immigration were devolved to the most local level possible, would freely choose to sort themselves according to very different demographic patterns from those which the state, through its invasive immigration policy, foists on them today. To allow our present immigration policy to continue, therefore, is to hand the state an enormous victory over the private property owners who must live with the forced integration of which the present system consists.

Many advocates of "open borders" con tend that the real culprit is the welfare state, and not immigration per se. But this will not do. We all would like to see an imme diate end to the welfare state, but with "welfare reform" another Beltway hoax and the rest of the New Deal/Great Society entitlement programs alive and well, this is no answer at all to those who are concerned about the unprecedentedly high infusion of immigrants, legal and illegal, into the United States. A Unique Crisis The current crisis is indeed unique in American history. As Peter Brimelow points out, previous waves of immigration were followed by long pauses during which the country was able to absorb and accul turate its new citizens. Not so today. The Immigration and Naturalization Service es timates the arrival of 12 to 13 million legal and illegalimmigrants into the United States over the course of the 1990s, the over whelming majority of whom will hail from radically different cultural environments from what they will find here. And there is no end in sight.

We must also ask ourselves seriously whether we will be more or less free after even two more generations of immigration of the size and composition of recent de cades. That immigrants and the American bureaucracy that serves them will become yet another pressure group, clamoring for privileges and benefits in Washington, can scarcely be doubted. The overwhelming majority of current immigrants is eligible for affirmative action and the myriad other benefits that accrue, at others' expense, to the protected classes. Yet there is a more subtle reason to be wary of the kind of radical heterogeneity that a continuation of current policy prom ises. In order to destroy the cultural and ethnic cohesion that acts as a bulwark against its expansion, the state has a history of engaging in deliberate demographic scrambling. When this forced integration inevitably produces animosity, the state is all too eager to impose order on a chaos of its own creation.

Massive migration of ethnic Russians into Estonia, for example, was deliberately enThe Foundation for Economic Education Irvington-on-Hudson, New York 10533 Tel. (914) 591-7230 Fax (914) 591-8910 E-mail: freeman@westnet.com December 1995 Love and Envy L ove and envy probably are the most bewitching of all emotions. Love blinds all men alike, both the wise and the foolish. Envy sharpens our eyes although it is a timid and shameful pas sion to which we dare not confess. Being unequal in ability, industry, and the rewards of our labors, we let the vice of envy creep into our hearts and make us miserable. If envy were a fever, many peo ple would be ill. Man is a social being who seeks protec tion and comfQrt in society. He takes care of his own with the help of others, work ing together in what economists call" divi sion of labor." It springs from individual inequality in inborn ability and acquired capability which permit individuals to per form different tasks. Individual inequality does not contradict the" self-evident truth"

that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." It is self-evident that innate inequality calls for equal individual esteem, regard, and respect, assuring social peace among unequal men. Social harmony and cooperation depend on the equal treatment of all members of society before the law. Many reformers frown upon this politi cal and legal equality as being inadequate; they would extend the scope of equality to economic life through political distribution of income and wealth. They would forcibly reduce economic inequality through taxa tion and outright confiscation, seizing income from productive members, giving some to unproductive or less productive individuals, and keeping some for the reg ulators, tax collectors, and confiscators. They would use force continually and relentlessly because people continue to dif fer in capacity, skill, strength, industry, training, and experience. They love force which breeds more force. They easily enslave servile natures; freemen seek to escape.

A policy designed to bring about econom ic equality opens the door for demagogues. It invites politicians to stir up the resentment of the poor against the rich so that they may elect those demagogues to positions of power and largess. Demagogues are agita tors who ask why anybody should be per- . mitted to earn millions while honest people linger in want and despair. Always ranting against the greed, lust, and corruption of the rich, they promise much but perform only evil. In the end, they incite the envious mob to plunder the rich. The quest for economic equality breeds a new race of politicians: hunters after popularity, they are men of ambition who seek the profits of office rather than honor and service, orators who wax eloquent of principle, having none themselves. They do not pursue what is right but rather what brings vulgar applause. While in the possession of political power, they lead a nation straight into despotism. Even if we were to surrender all our freedoms to them, there would be no equality of position and income. The taskmasters would take the place of the rich, and political power would triumph over economic pro ductivity.

In an economic order not guided by resentment and envy, the people are pre occupied with their own problems. Every individual faces the challenge of earning enough income to satisfy his needs and wants. He may contribute to the process of production and thus earn an income or be supported by others who do participate. Infants, the aged, and the handicapped obviously must depend on their support ers, while all others face the challenge of earning an income and providing for themselves and the persons who rely on them. He who refuses to contribute to pro duction does not earn his keep, but is free to remain idle. In a command system, he has no such choice; the government forces him to participate in any way the officials see fit. The police, judges, and jailers exact everyone's contribution to the joint effort. An envy-free society is clear of political power and coercion. It imposes restraints only on criminal acts that inflict harm on persons and their property. There are no economic commands, rather merely indi rect pressures on individuals to cooperate in the process of production. The market order allocates income in accordance with the services rendered and contributions made to social wellbeing. It rewards indi vidual effort according to the value of the service rendered, which creates an incen tive for everyone to apply his abilities to the utmost. Free societies enjoy great pro ductivity, high individual incomes, and commensurate standards of living.

Welfare states pursue a relentless policy of income equalization. Driven by the envy of voters, they seek equality through con fiscatory taxation of incomes and estates. But a policy of confiscation is always short-lived; it may succeed once only when it is not expected. As a continuing policy it is rather ineffective as the owners prefer to consume their capital instead of saving it for the tax collectors and expropriators or, if such capital is liquid, send it abroad to invest in foreign enterprises. Countries that lose capital suffer economic stagnation and decline; countries that attract capital enjoy rising labor productiv ity and wage rates. After all, saving and investing determine the productivity of labor and provide the means for the improvement of future conditions. Confisca tory taxation is not the only method of capital consumption; deficit spending and banking regulation have the same desolating effects. Legislators and regulators like to channel the people's sav ings to government, which promptly con sumes them. All the funds of Social Security and large funds of private trusts and investment companies consist of gov ernment IOUs, which are certificates of capital consumption. While individual savers and investors are providing goods and services for the future, government is committed almost exclusively to the enjoy ments and pleasures of the moment. While individual saving and investing make for peaceful cooperation and social division of labor, political spending invariably gener ates bitter conflict not only between the beneficiaries and victims but also the gen erations. Deficit spending tends to con sume both - capital accumulated by past generations and the seed corn for future generations. It is difficult to imagine a poli cy more destructive than deficit spending.

Love makes all hearts gentle except those touched by envy. Most of the eco nomic and social misery which welfare states bring upon the world is inflicted by demagogues stirring up the resentment of voters. Unable to attain the income of the rich, they rail at it. All kinds of problems are solvable except those which spring from envy. Hans F. Sennholz An Exciting, Educational Experience College Course in January January 2-20, 1996 The Foundation for Economic Education is con ducting a special three-credit course taught by fEE professors and staff in MICROECONOMICS at Mercy College Dobbs Ferry, NY 10522 (one mile south of FEE headquarters) Tuition, fees, housing, and meals $1,150.00 I f you are interested, make application for admission to The Foundation for Economic Education and submit a letter of good stand ing from the institution in which you are current ly enrolled. Special, non-credit students of all ages are welcome.

Application deadline: December IS, 1995.

New from FEE An Endless Series of Hobgoblins: The Science and Politics of Environmental Health Scares by Eric Hagen and James Worman T he American public is constantly warned about the d~nger of man-made chemicals. Hackneyed admonitions regarding the risk of cancer ring out when a new chemical product is introduced. Unfortunately, the public normally only hears one side of the story. The truth behind the scares rarely sees the light of day. In FEE's latest release, Eric Hagen and James Worman examine the three major chemical scares of our time-Alar, Asbestos, and Dioxin. The authors expose the uncertainties of the risk assessments, the costly federal regulations that follow, and the dis mal quality of the" science" behind the hysteria. The research presented pro vides a genuinely eye-opening account of the dangers of pseudo-science and environmental alarmism. 89 pages $9.95 paperback Private Cures for Public Ills: The Promise of Privatization edited by Lawrence W. Reed P rom garbage collection to policing, services once considered the province of the public sector are moving to the private sector.

Americans are quickly learning the value of privatization in terms of cost and efficiency. Unlike many public departments and agencies, private firms respond to market forces and thus to the wishes of the people. Services are delivered not begrudgingly, but promptly and economically. The essays in this important new book from FEE examine the history of pri vatization, its successes, and prospects for the future. The contributors-prominent scholars, professors, and policy analysts--provide an in-depth look at this wave of the future. Private Cures for Public Ills is the definitive examination of the promise of privatization. 200 pages,indexed $14.95 paperback Please add $3 per order of $25 or less, $4 per order of $26-$50. Send your order with the accompanying check or money order to FEE, 30 South Broadway, Irvington-on-Hudson, NY 10533. Visa and MasterCard tele phone and fax orders are welcomed: (800) 432-3518; fax (914) 591-8910.