Jacob G. Hornberger at the Future of Freedom Foundation and Dylan Matthews at Vox.com write on the refugees currently pouring into Europe from the Middle East and how Western nations should open their borders to them.
Let’s count the number of times the word “welfare” is mentioned.
- Hornberger’s article: 1, and only referencing FRD’s love for the welfare state, not how the welfare state and open borders are intertwined.
- Matthews’ article: 1, and it refers to the “welfare” (wellbeing) of people outside the United States.
What is it with open borders advocates absolutely ignoring the issue of the welfare state and how it could be reduced or curbed while allowing anyone in to take advantage of it through open borders? If one of them has a solution on how to deal with the welfare state while having open borders, I’m all ears. But I continually search and still can’t find a single article proposing it.
Meanwhile, a whole host of Middle Eastern countries have refused to take in a single refugee, despite being closer to Syria than any European nation. When will the open borders advocates write articles about those nations’ immigration laws and borders? Why is all the attention on making sure Western countries open their borders, but not the borders of nations most adjacent?
Some might say that it’s because Western nations are the ones causing the crisis by meddling in Middle Eastern politics and destabilizing countries like Syria, but one injustice does not justify another. Those who bombed these regions will not have to pay the price for open borders when immigrants and refugees swarm into nations with welfare states; it will be the same citizens who were taxed to pay for the foreign interventions in the first place.
It’s glaring discrepancies like these in open border arguments that arouse suspicion of unspoken motives.