In a not-so-recent column Lew Rockwell, one of the most relevant libertarians of today, expressed a very surprising idea: that open borders are an assault on private property. Briefly explained, in a true libertarian society where land is owned by private persons instead of the government, people could only move there with the consent of the owner. In a non-libertarian society the government has the monopoly of land ownership through forced taxation, but it cannot be said that this public property is truly owned by the state. Likewise, it cannot be said that it is “unowned” –but it belongs, for instance, to taxpayers.
The argument can be easily simplified in a different way: the state pretends to own the land, and the state is legitimized to do so with my consent –i.e., my taxes–, so every single individual has the right to express their dissent with an “open borders policy” if he doesn’t like it. It is not about “Are open borders good?”, but about what you can do with your own property. Open borders being good or bad is a moral question, not a legal one, and it is not the concern of libertarianism per se. And why would a libertarian accept state-sponsored open borders? Isn’t libertarianism about reducing the competences of the state, rather than maximizing them?
When open borders and immigration happen with the aid of the state, within the framework of the government, everything goes wrong. Let me give you a few examples of this. When the Hague Tribunal determined that a part of the South China Sea did not belong to China, Chinese people took over Facebook and Instagram to insult and abuse Philippines, Vietnam, and America. The amount of hatred and verbal violence can only be compared –for real– with Nazism and the KKK. This is not an exaggeration. Even one guy got beaten up in the subway for wearing Nike shoes. Chinese beating Chinese? I guess it’s Cultural Revolution all over again!
Just yesterday, Mack Horton “sledged” his Chinese rival Sun Yang calling him a “drug cheat” for testing positive to a banned substance. Facebook felt immediately the wraith of the offended Chinese people, with thousands of comments repeating exactly the same words, over and over again, from offensive and racist slandering of Horton and the Australian people to death threats. Do you want to get your own Facebook account banned? Just comment defending Horton, and thousands of Chinese will post offensive and threatening messages against you and your country in your own Facebook page, send you disgusting messages about how ugly white people are, and report your account for whatever meaningless reason such as “offending the sensibility of the Chinese race”. And what happens when Facebook gets thousands of reports at the same time? Do they read all of them and make a fair judgment? Yeah, of course they do!
Chinese people cannot use Facebook without a VPN, but when they do so, when they “climb the Great Firewall” and have a taste of freedom, they use it to slander others. Shortly said, this is sick. Chinese youth today are not different from the Red Guards, the fanatised student mass that took arms to defend their own slaughter during the Cultural Revolution. Angry kids looking for a scapegoat to blame for their own failures, so they do not have to deal with their own, daily mediocrity. In their locust-like Chinese mind, they think that the sins of an individual are the sins of a nation, because for the brainwashed Chinese mob, there is no such thing as a free individual. If you are Australian you are an Australian dog, just like Mack Horton. I guess that makes Chinese people a bunch of drug addicts, dog eaters too?
The same can be said about open borders between China and Hong Kong: they are not real open borders, but state-sponsored intervention that only works in one direction and benefits their own respective governments, not the people. Chinese people moving to Hong Kong usually end up living in bad conditions –as do immigrants in any country with state-sponsored immigration policies–, and Hong Kong people have to feel not only the hideous habits and uneducated manners of Chinese immigrants, but many other problems such as housing and expropriation. If immigrants had no government incentives to go to Hong Kong –or any other place–, only those who desire to share the same values of the receiving country will remain.
And the same works for Germany, Sweden, or even Facebook.