Give Us Your Tired, Your Poor
By Robert Higgs • Friday August 6, 2010 8:34 AM PDT • 25 Comments
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.
. . .
On second thought, to hell with them.
First they came for the lettuce pickers, and I did not speak out because I was not a lettuce picker.
Then they came for the maids and the dishwashers, and I did not speak out because I was not a maid or a dishwasher.
Then they came for the gardeners and the nannies, and I did not speak out because I was not a gardener or a nanny.
Then they came for the meatpacking workers, and I did not speak out because I was not a meatpacking worker.
Then they came for the construction workers, and I did not speak out because I was not a construction worker.
When they come for me, will anyone speak out for me?
Tags: Immigration, Latin America, Liberty, Morality, Peace, Personal Liberty, Politics, Power, Property Rights, Surveillance, The State 
Dear Dr. Higgs,
You are one of my favorite authors. I have learned a great deal from you. I have the utmost respect for you, and genuinely hesitate to say anything that diminishes your honor.
But please ask yourself: Does this blog post make any sense?
Eric | Aug 6, 2010 | Reply
It makes sense to me, for what it’s worth.
Anthony Gregory | Aug 6, 2010 | Reply
The title of the post, which is continued above the picture is from the poem that if found on the Statue of Liberty (on the tablet she holds to be specific).
The second part, below the picture is a reworking of a statement by Pastor Martin Neimoller,
“THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.
THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”
Basically what Dr. Higgs is calling attention too is the gross hypocrisy of our nation and how we are besmirching some of its better historical moments and looking more and more like a police state.
It isn’t all that hard to get once you are familiar with the things he is referencing.
Steve Verdon | Aug 6, 2010 | Reply
For those who can make sense out of the idea that gay Mexican Muslims are invading America to destroy the American way of life, this blog post probably makes no sense at all.
This post makes sense to me – unfortunately, little else does. However, I think in his attempt to explain this post, Steve may have actually added to the confusion of folks who were having trouble making sense out of it by stirring up their cognitive dissonance.
Tom Blanton | Aug 6, 2010 | Reply
Tom,
Gay Mexican Muslims? that’s a hoot! Thanks for a good chuckle.
Ed Burley | Aug 6, 2010 | Reply
Whenever I am overcome with grief from considering the effects of these completely backward and asinine policies, I use as sort of a mental backstop a remembrance of what it must have been like for Mises. He grew up and spent the first third of his life in what many of us would characterize as the peak of the liberal epoch, at least up to this point in human history. But from the outbreak of the Great War on through the time of his death he witnessed the progressive decline in the liberal social institutions that he came to appreciate so deeply. From the two most heinous conflicts in human history through witnessing Nixon’s severing of the last vestiges of the gold standard, among surely many other remarkable things, Mises experienced the most depressing progression of historical events ever. Yet he persevered. I truly hope I can be as steadfast as he, though it is at times particulary trying. Best of luck in your efforts Prof. Higgs.
Ryan Szabo | Aug 6, 2010 | Reply
It needs to be said: people want control over the racial composition of their communities. The Civil Rights Act made this illegal on a voluntary basis, so people are appealing to the state to do the same job.
James Caan | Aug 7, 2010 | Reply
Besides The Wall in old East Germany, this bit reminded me of a religious leader in Iowa a few years back who said we need these people to come up here and help with the crops, we need to set up stations down there to inform people in Mexico how to get here and help them to do so.
So, it appears this whole mess is over nothing more than certification, kind of like with guns in the U.S.? Or union membership?
All my life people have told me driving a car is a priviledge, ok, so how come the act of buying or carrying a gun is treated the same as a drivers license? Again, this whole mess is over nothing more than certification, and with certification comes control and power over people.
And They Thought They Were Free.
clark | Aug 7, 2010 | Reply
http://www.statueliberty.net/statue-of-liberty-poem.html
A few posts above prove the resounding success of the US public education system to create a nation of utterly ignorant people.
alzurzin | Aug 7, 2010 | Reply
Hello folks!? Which part of “illegal alien” is it that is so hard to understand ?? We have laws about immigration. The wild-west frontier is closed. We’ve had laws for a long time. We had them when Ellis Island and Angel Island were active immigration processing centers, and many were sent back home ! We also have ordered liberty for a reason. To cheapen the debate by trying to play the race, religion, or even sex pervert cards – again – is emotional, but intellectually dishonest. Let’s compare America to a movie theater, or sports arena, even a store – not a perfect example, but it will have to do. There is a process, a price, and a time for admission. And the popcorn or merchandise isn’t free either. We the owners have a right to control who gets in, when, and the burglars who crash the gates or sneak in the back door propped open by their inside man deserve to be thrown out as the crooks and thieves that they are. You want in ? Fine. Wait in line, come in by the front door, and pay the admission like everyone else. Obey the law, don’t sneak-thief your way in, respect the rights and interests of those who own the establishment, and don’t commit identity theft to game the system. Every other country in the civilized world, even Mexico, has strict rules that we as visitors have to respect – it’s about time we got serious and enforced the same.
Greg | Aug 10, 2010 | Reply
No one has a right to control the racial composition of the community in which he lives. What he can do is move to one that fits his racist prejudice more closely.
There was nothing voluntary about the Civil Rights Act. It was passed by a criminal organization called Congress, that gets its money by stealing from taxpayers.
Which part of “Taxation is theft” do you not understand?
The 50 individual states (or as I call them, People’s Republics) are also criminal organizations. State and national boundaries have no legal legitimacy in libertarian theory. A city or regional boundary is helpful for things like mail delivery, map location, driving, and other logistical matters, but otherwise has no reason to exist.
Bill Stepp | Aug 10, 2010 | Reply
Greg, The problem with your analogy is that “we” (i.e., you, I and anyone else) don’t own other people’s private property and have no rightful say over how it is peacefully used. This is what property rights means. Moreover, the only areas that face disputes regarding immigration and most other civil matters are “public” areas and programs run by governments which create a “tragedy of the commons.” But in such cases, the solution is to privatize any such domains to eliminate the cause of such conflicts and restore property to its rightful owners or create new owners. As a result, it is the property owner who sets the immigration policies over his/her property and property owners can come together as a group contractually to do likewise. Anyone else including government bodies have again no rightful sovereignty to do so and any attempts to impose immigration policies through command-and-control (i.e., socialist) measures are unjust and bound to fail. Finally, the evidence is overwhelming that most immigrants are not free-riders or malcontents, but instead people seeking honest work in the private sector. Meanwhile, it is most Americans who cling to the welfare state and other free-loading schemes.
Please see:
“Immigration in the Twenty-First Century: A Personnel Selection Approach,” by Lawrence Brunner and Stephen M. Colarelli (The Independent Review, Winter 2010)
“If Mexicans and Americans Could Cross the Border Freely,” by Jacques Delacroix and Sergey Nikiforov (The Independent Review, Summer 2009)
“Nation of Origin Bias and the Enforcement of Immigration Laws by the Immigration and Naturalization Service,” by Jim F. Couch, Brett A. King, William H. Wells, and Peter M. Williams
“The Immigration Problem: Then and Now,” by Lowell E. Gallaway, Stephen Moore and Richard K. Vedder (The Independent Review, Winter 2000)
David Theroux | Aug 10, 2010 | Reply
Gee. Is Robert Higgs counting his days until he’s deported?
Suppose that story is reworded as:
“They came for the litterer and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a litterer
They came for the pickpocketer and I didn’t speak up because then I wasn’t a pickpocketer
They came for the burglar and I didn’t speak up becausethen I wasn’t a burglar
They came for the mugger and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a mugger
They came for the rapist and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a rapist
They came for the murderer and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a rapist
Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up.”
Does the reworded story make any difference? Probably as many here believe government shouldn’t even exist at all.
Gil | Aug 10, 2010 | Reply
@Gil
John McCarthy once said, “He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.”
It looks like that’s exactly what you have done. Look at the percentage of immigrants who are actually criminals.
fvh | Aug 10, 2010 | Reply
Of all the problems discussed on the sites devoted to libertarianism and Austrian economics, it seems to me that immigration debate causes the most honest disagreement, that is to say it is the most divisive. Once again we see that anytime there is a particularly knotty problem such as here, there is government at the bottom of it, government having painted us into a corner because of its solving problems caused by its previous solutions to similar problems ad (seemingly) infinitum, in the cycle with which we are all familiar.
We can probably all agree that minimal government would have prevented this from ever becoming a problem, but we confront a fait accompli. There is no easy solution here that I can see, folks, in which case I always revert to the touchstone: which way lies liberty? In this case, I must agree with Dr. Higgs.
Bernard Carlisle | Aug 11, 2010 | Reply
@Ryan
I have never thought of it like that. Excellent point. He took seriously his personal motto. (See LvMI website)
Bernard | Aug 11, 2010 | Reply
First they came to work, then they came for food stamps, then they came for child support, then they came for medical care, then they wanted their grandparents on welfare, then they wanted to vote, then they elected politicians who increased their benefits.
MERLIN | Aug 11, 2010 | Reply
Mr. Obama, tear down this wall!
Anthony Lima | Aug 11, 2010 | Reply
It still amazes me to no end that many continue to equate immigration with violence, while having no qualms about getting resources through the coercive force of the state from other fellow “citizens” against their will.
Let’s face it folks, the immigration debate is largely between two camps of looters. In the middle of it all, we libertarians are seen as dangerous for asking that we just respect each other’s property and get along.
Thank you Mr. Higgs for bringing this up to our attention.
DW | Aug 14, 2010 | Reply
“...will anyone speak out for me?”
Depends, are you a landscaper?
Stickman | Aug 21, 2010 | Reply
Greg...you make too much sense. There’s too much reason in your response. That must be why I like it so much. I have no problem with allowing more immigrants into the U.S. But there is a process (a federal law) as you explained. We need to let these folks in...to help pay for all the debt we have incurred in the past few months. All the money spent on border patrol to keep them out, should be spent on building new processing centers to get them in (legally). I know of what I speak...I live on the border.
Jennifer | Sep 8, 2010 | Reply
If you talking about “undocumented”, the answer is 100%.
By definition.
vladimir shlain | Sep 27, 2010 | Reply
Or better yet move to the other side.
vladimir shlain | Sep 27, 2010 | Reply