Letting the looters vote on who’s for lunch

A recent column on the euphemisms used by proponents of illegal-immigrant amnesty brought some irate buzzing from all seven members of the Young Anarchists’ League.

As near as I can figure, I’m “not allowed” to call for the enforcement of current immigration laws — or possibly of any laws, even those few (including the immigration laws) enacted within the powers delegated to Congress under the Constitution — since any such enforcement of the law amounts to some kind of “collectivist police state fascism” against people who have “not initiated force or fraud.”

I’m not sure how you cut through a border fence without “initiating force,” or how you rent an apartment, register a car, and go to work every day using someone else’s social Security number without “initiating fraud.”

I’m further “not allowed” to cite the cost to taxpayers of illegal alien trespassers swarming our public schools and hospitals, lest I be accused of somehow “supporting” tax subsidies for schools and hospitals. (Literally: “Why exactly do you want to save socialist policies like government control over schools and hospitals?” It’s as though I warned people what might happen if they let their children swim in a crocodile-infested river, only to be asked “Why exactly do you want to save hideous practices like the eating of small children by crocodiles?”)

As it so happens, as a Libertarian (not an anarchist) I DO stand proudly and publicly against tax subsidies for schools and hospitals. People should pay their own way, and seek private charity if unable to do so. This would bring down costs for all of us, by giving us a one-on-one fee-for-service relationship with the doctor and the schoolmarm, cutting out the mobs of bureaucrats now processing all the paperwork, and allowing us to fire anyone not meeting our requirements.

But that’s not enough for my young anarchist friends. Instead, I am apparently obliged to pretend these current, swelling tax burdens DO NOT EXIST.

Perhaps this is an easier position to maintain if Mommy and Daddy still pay all your taxes, while allowing you to live in the basement, pounding your keyboard.

I do remember hearing my friend Jackie Casey, former head of the college Libertarians at the University of Arizona, regaling me with tales of how she would join her mother to visit rental properties the family owned south of Tuscon.

Virtually every night, the human waves pouring north through the area would invade these residence units, using the sinks and other available surfaces for bodily activities which most of us reserve for actual toilets. Jackie and her mom would don elbow-length rubber gloves and go to work with their ammonia and bleach, cleaning up the human feces deposited by our noble wave of “harmless guest workers” who I’m “not allowed” to call trespassers because they “never initiative force or fraud” against anyone, merely going “where landlords and employers want them.”

“How does giving amnesty to a couple million knowing law-breakers not encourage the next set of knowing law-breakers, inviting them in no uncertain terms to ‘Come on in and enjoy all the free stuff; after a few years you can get ‘amnestied’, too!”?” I asked in my June 14 column.

“You say ‘knowing law-breakers’ like it’s supposed to be a bad thing to knowingly break the law,” objected one of my irate young correspondents. “Coming from someone who so vocally praises the American Revolution, this seems odd.”


Tara Cleveland was a lovely Las Vegas beauty pageant runner-up, an all-A student who wanted to go to law school and who sang at an annual “Spring Fling” employee party here at the Review-Journal 15 years ago. A short time later she was involved in a minor traffic accident in nearby North Las Vegas in which her car was struck by another car driven by two illegal Mexicans — pardon me, two “honored guest workers from south of the arbitrary government-drawn line known as the ‘border,’ who were here only to seek honest work and better themselves.”

These two honored Latino guest workers immediately thought, “What would brave freedom fighters like George Washington and Nathan Hale have done, in these circumstances?” So, of course, they ran away.

Tara Cleveland may have acted unwisely, but she was doubtless filled with righteous outrage that this twosome showed no intention of standing responsible for the damage they had caused (a scenario repeated literally scores of times every day, throughout the Southwest, driving all our insurance rates sky high, if I’m “allowed” to mention that.)

Tara pursued and confronted the pair. At that point, channeling the spirits of brave patriots like John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, these two south-of-the-border freedom fighters shot Tara Cleveland in the face with a double-barrelled shotgun, which had the predictable effect of killing her. They then stole her car and ran away again, eventually reaching Mexico. (www.lvrj.com/news/47992826.html.)

It sure puts me in mind of the courage, the principles, the self-sacrifice of the men who risked their lives and their personal fortunes to fight the American Revolution, doesn’t it you?

One of the pair, Joseph Villezcas, was turned over by Mexican authorities in 2006, after they determined he was not actually a Mexican national. He was returned to Nevada and convicted of second-degree murder. But the other, now-33-year-old Fernando Garcia Valenzuela, received sanctuary in Mexico.

Clearly a genius on the order of Ben Franklin, freedom-fighter Valenzuela was not about to stay home, though. He was arrested in California in 1998 and 1999, though authorities there did not link him to the outstanding Las Vegas warrant, possibly because he used fake ID and a fake date of birth — while somehow still not “initiating force or fraud,” you understand.

What an inspiration, that Fernando Garcia Valenzuela. They should put a flintlock in his hand and add his image to that statue of the Minuteman on Lexington green, don’t you think?

Valenzuela, who does not seem to be God’s most brilliant criminal, was pulled over by police in Whiteville, Tenn again last month, arrested on three felony drug charges, and — guess what? — finally linked to the 15-year-old warrant for the murder of Tara Cleveland.

“I’m sure there are some individual illegal immigrants who are irresponsible,” responded one of the armchair anarchists who wrote to take me to task for my police-state leanings, last month. (They don’t use their real names; I will refrain from dubbing this one “Buzz Spacecat.”)

But “So what?” Buzz continued. “I hear some native-born Americans are irresponsible, too.”

Where do these people live? By the time I get to the jump page of the “local criminal trial” section of my daily paper, these days, I practically have to color code the stories to keep straight which illegal alien committed which child murder.

The Federation for American Immigration Reform (www.fairus.org) reports “criminal,” criminal aliens now account for 29 percent of prisoners in federal Bureau of Prisons facilities.

Even if there are now 30 million illegals in this country — sounds high to me, but who really knows? — that means they’re overrepresented in our prisons by a factor of three. And none of those inmates are in there for their initial crime of violating the immigration laws, you understand.

Since local police and school agencies adamantly refuse to make any effort to count illegals and their children — lest they be accused of “racism” — such numbers are much harder to acquire for local jurisdictions. But since illegal alien trespassers are more likely to violate local laws (burglary, murder, etc), than federal laws other than immigration laws (which apparently “don’t count”), it seems safe to assume their representation in state and local prisons is even higher, particularly here in the Southwest.

Taxpayers now spend more than $1 billion per year maintaining “criminal,” criminal aliens in federal and state prisons, according to the U.S. Bureau of Justice.

And ask those charged with collecting hospital bills how many illegal aliens make good faith efforts to pay the huge bills for the emergency rooms they use in lieu of paying a hundred bucks for a routine doctor visit.

There IS a theory that this is a good thing: “Let socialism be overburdened and collapse. Then we will build a better, more Libertarian society on the ruins.”

Interesting theory. It can be argued, for instance, that a society more respectful of the Rights of Man was built on the ruins of Rome, once Rome fell.

It was. The only problem is — it took about a thousand years.

If there is no right to exclude looters from our midst; if we must allow free entry to anyone who wants to come to our community — and the smallest community is my house — and then allow them to decide how my stuff shall be redistributed “by majority vote,” then freedom of a family of three can last only until four “guest workers” break down our front door (“Buzz” can hardly say, “But that would be illegal,” since he’s already endorsed felony lawbreaking by millions of freeloading looters as some kind of noble evocation of the spirit of the patriots of 1776) and “vote” on how to divvy up the food in my refrigerator.

I would wish Buzz a happy life in the Looters’ Carnival he prescribes for all of us — if only I were not forced at gunpoint to share it with him.

NEXT TIME: Far from being incompatible with living in freedom, restricting who is allowed to join your community is a VITAL COMPONENT of any plan to maintain basic freedoms and human rights.

5 Comments to “Letting the looters vote on who’s for lunch”

  1. Robert Dion Says:

    I am befuddled and cannot imagine how anyone can support anyone taking advantage of our country. Yes I understand charitable arguments, religious arguments, and political arguments that support these illegal activities. However common sense says NO. The attributes that made this country great was hard work, individualism and self reliance. These interlopers want to take a short cut rather then making their own country like ours. Hey let us sneak across the border and demand free medicine, education, welfare and a right to vote so we eventually will run the good old USA and make it just like where we came, our homeland. Wake up you idiots these people mean the end of your soft life.

  2. Free In Idaho! » Blog Archive » One Little Detail Says:

    […] Vin Suprynowicz reminds us of a small detail I’ve heard way too many folks ignore lately… There IS a theory that this is a good thing: “Let socialism be overburdened and collapse. Then we will build a better, more Libertarian society on the ruins.” […]

  3. Letting the looters vote on who’s for lunch « Immigration Watch International Says:

    […] SOURCE […]

  4. Robert l. Fennell Says:

    I read your article while vacating in Las Vegas and concur with your opinions. It is unfortunate that our elected representatives including President Obama want to shove Comprehensive Immigration Reform, code for Amnesty, down American Citizens throat. When polled the majority of American Citizens oppose a path for Citizens, and Amnesty for those that entered our country illegally. In fact most want current immigration laws enforced that would result in deportation of those here illegally.
    Also, most American Citizens acknowledge that our laws are violated when entry is illegal and any childrens born in this country are fruit of the illegal activity and therefore should not become citizens.
    With that said American Citizens must oppose any and all attempts to pass any bill that will grant Citizenship to those that committed a felony by entering this country illegally.
    It is UN-American to put illegal immigrants welfare before American Welfare and expect Tax payers to keep providing social services to illegal Aliens immigrants.

  5. Robert l. Fennell Says:

    Please review my website at http://www.fennelltruthmysite.com and read my opinions on Illegal immigration, E-Veriy and other topics.