Hardly surprising that the first 4 Babylon stations failed.;^)

RE: what values and culture is allowed in. Excellent perspective from a Peach Corps survivor:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articl...

Correct.
However the fact remains that we don't desire destructively jealous individuals to migrate here because our survival as a nation depends upon immigration by those who see opportunities for individual growth and the freedom here to do so.

We need good people who value the good in themselves and in others.

I have lived a long life.

My greatest problems in this life (life-ruining events) have been generated by destructively jealous individuals (who weren't immigrants).

I am issuing a warning about human nature and what types of people to be aware of. They are everywhere....and we don't need to import any more of them.

Wisdom must be used in the process when immigration status is issued and yes, we need to protect our survival.

After I heard Rand lecture in Boston, 1973, she was asked about immigration. She positively came out in favor of immigration. "You have no right to bar others." What she would NOT favor is any form of "public assistance" for anyone, including immigrants. And owing to increased terrorist activity since 1973, she'd very likely be in favor of vetting immigrants. I have some rare original Ayn Rand material on this and many other issues -- including many signed items. Archangels@att.net

Yes they are conscious beings. They have to be conscious to riot. When a fellow rioter hits them over the head they may no longer be conscious. They aren't rioting then either.

Here is a Prime Example of what happens when a diametrically opposed culture is forced upon a civilized country.

Just tell me these are conscious beings...

https://conservativetribune.com/offic...

Culture matters. Western culture, which included France in the not-so-distant-past, respects private property and understands that destructive actions have consequences.

Sure, criminals can be found in every country, and pranks or boisterous celebrations aren’t a new phenomenon. A thousand cars up in smoke and flames goes far beyond a prank, however. It is not “boys being boys.”

Immigrants don't lose their natural rights because of their thoughts or feelings of some kind of envy or hatred. They can be excluded for not having the means or desire to support themselves or if they seek to overthrow (what is left of) the system of government protecting freedom and individual rights, but government involving itself with ideas and what people have been "taught" is very dangerous. If someone is openly vilifying the nation then that's another matter.

We don't think in terms of "utopia" that would require "changing human nature", and don't dream about it with or without the aid of substances in pipes; we deal with human nature as it is in establishing moral and legal principles. Ensuring our survival has no contingencies.

Owners of private property do not dictate immigration law. Like any law, conditions for entering the country, including the ones you mention, are not contingent on who someone wants to invite to his property. Illegal immigration is not a matter of trespass.

The country is not defended by anarchy. Any country subject to a large influx of "looters" tantamount to invasion has a right to control it through immigration law.

The problem in my state is they gave the illegals, legality and they do pay some taxes, BUT...the rest of us have to pay for their Short Falls to the tune of 800.00 per year per legal citizen. They are in no way self sufficient.
Because of this, I have No abundance to do as I wish...it's Taken From me.

There are way too many parasitical creatures on our payroll.

Ok...not that familiar with libertarian morality or if they have it. they do seem to think anything goes...I will give you that.
Thanks

You do not seem to be following the thread well.
I referred to Libertarian morality, not Rand's morality. I fully understand her philosophy.
Rational self-interest IS the central point of her morality: "rational" is the key word - one acting for his own sake and welfare without any interference of others' rights.

VERY TRUE.

Actually, that was sometimes the custom in Augusta County where I was raised. I don't know if it is done still. I suppose it is not right.

I don't know. I think she did not like others trying to
speak for her.
If the owner of private property decides he is willing for a foreigner to come on to it, perhaps he has that right (although even then, certain principles should have to be satisfied: medical examination for contagious diseases, maybe criminal background check, etc).
We do have to worry about criminal, physical, foreign aggression, (such as armed invasion).

As a libertarian, I can visualize the possibility of open borders but only after all government social programs are eliminated. The current inhabitants would also have to be free to own any kind of weapon including tanks and more to be able to defend themselves from the resulting wave of incoming looters.

What "nevertheless"? Anyone can enter your private property if you think they deserve to. The Valley was private property, not a country. Ayn Rand supported the right of immigration, but not "open border" anarchy or any other kind of anarchy. Private property is unrelated to immigration to a nation; there is no requirement of "deserving" to have the natural rights of the individual, only the requirement to respect the rights of others.

The passage from Galt's speech is also taken out of context. There was no such sweeping invitation into the Valley during the strike. He was talking about the process of reclaiming the country during the chaos following the impending collapse:

"When the looters' state collapses, deprived of the best of its slaves, when it falls to a level of impotent chaos, like the mystic-ridden nations of the Orient, and dissolves into starving robber gangs fighting to rob one another—when the advocates of the morality of sacrifice perish with their final ideal—then and on that day we will return.

"We will open the gates of our city to those who deserve to enter, a city of smokestacks, pipe lines, orchards, markets and inviolate homes. We will act as the rallying center for such hidden outposts as you'll build. With the sign of the dollar as our symbol—the sign of free trade and free minds—we will move to reclaim this country once more from the impotent savages who never discovered its nature, its meaning, its splendor. Those who choose to join us, will join us; those who don't, will not have the power to stop us; hordes of savages have never been an obstacle to men who carried the banner of the mind.

"Then this country will once more become a sanctuary for a vanishing species: the rational being..."

Ayn called our age: THE AGE OF ENVY.

IMO that is the motivation that must be absent from the individual immigrant.

Unfortunately that emotion is widely used to justify theft of all sorts by even our government and radical destruction by those who have been taught vilification of our nation.

The thought of open borders is utopian. We would have to be able to change human nature in order to insure our survival.

That's a pipe dream.

As with most burning issues of today, there are so many interrelated wrongs that is almost impossible to find a right. IF government only existed to protect individual rights through the police, the military and the courts as Objectivists believe, then open borders would be moot. Immigrants would only be restricted during times of declared war with their country, or infection with contagious disease. As a preemptive measure those convicted of violent crimes would be excludes but this would require a lot of limitations. We can't deal with this issue because we are a welfare state and our policies are based on altruism, statism and corrupted politics. Our racism, bigotry and fear that someone will earn some reward that should have been ours further hinders our thinking on immigration and with all of the above we have a Gordian Knot.

In America, white people are too entitled to work, black people did their work, as slaves, so they don't have to work any more. Physical labor is done by brown people, Hispanics, Asians, Middle Easterners, etc. We don't want the damn jobs and we want the results but we don't want the people that make it all possible. I think we don't have an immigration problem but we have many problems that get exposed when this issue is discussed.

Nevertheless, John Galt promised that he and his fellow residents of the Valley would "open the gates of our city to all who deserve to enter."

You're right, freedomforall. "The final frontier" has not been reached yet. Soon it will no longer be only science fiction. It will just take a gargantuan human collaboration within the laws of physics and voluntary splicing of individualist tendencies into the aggregate effort. Only the most daring, the new pioneers, will go and enrich the space-faring generations with their spirit of innovation, resourcefulness, and communal solidarity. Where the safety margin of survival is so narrow, unfettered freedom becomes constrained, and the shared cultural template is rewritten. Call it an investment in future flourishing.

Migrations on earth take for granted a hospitable physical environment. In space everything has to be brought or made: air, water, food, replaceable resources. There is no room for waste or error--or rebels--where imminent perishing looms in every moment.

Ayn Rand's ideas are not whatever beliefs someone already holds while happening to like some aspect of a novel. The repetitive personal resentment from some towards her here, and the constant promotion of conservative or other beliefs contrary to her philosophy of reason and egoism, with complete disregard for the clashes, do in fact show how little interest there is here in pursuing and understanding her ideas. So does the 'downvoting' of posts that explain the difference, whether out of hostility or indifference.

In particular, Olduglycarl's repeated pushing of mysticism and his theory of humans who are supposedly not conscious are the opposite of Ayn Rand, and he seems to know it. Being an emotional "fan" of something about Ayn Rand's novels is not an interest in her ideas. Observing that is not an insult.

So, you don't think Objectivism has a built in morality?...Rational celf interest dictates that objectivity be moral otherwise, it would be irrational...Right?

If that were to happen, I can see problems down the road when populations cluster and turn those areas into "S**T Holes".
I still say, that to be open bordered we must have Everything in common; language, culture, laws, money and moral norms and currency...otherwise we'll just have One Big Mess. Right back to our days in Babylon...as you know, that experiment failed epically.

Can't have cannibalistic, barbaric, illiterate cultures mixed in with Conscious, peace loving, creative, productive, educated cultures.

The Valley was hidden to protect it from invasion. Immigration was not relevant because it was private property open by invitation only, not a country.

Countries and their border are not backyards with fences. Ayn Rand did support immigration, but not invasion in the name of immigration. https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...