Pragmatists Aren't From Mars, After All

On the one hand, Haitian immigrants might expropriate our property through the vote. They might not. Is this a mark against open immigration as such? I concede: Of course not, but instead it is a mark against majoritarian rule (the similar critique applies to my concerns with the welfare state and its usage by immigrants, too). I am obviously concerned, however, with the state of how things actually are. But Block is right (here) that being a pragmatist and going against your philosophical starting point is or can be a slippery slope.

Makes me think: What if, tomorrow, the U.S. found out that, say, Costa Rica has been plotting against it for decades, and has the complete capacity and intent on blowing every square mile of U.S. territory to bits? In fact, the U.S. knows when Costa Rica is going to do this, and the U.S. also knows where such weapons are located (no, really, we know this time) and could peremptorily strike first, preventing the whole shabang.

Is military intervention justified?

Certainly not from a Libertarian point of view. U.S. military intervention would involve the expropriation of resources via taxation of U.S. citizens, and if just one taxpayer said, "To hell with ya," it is unjustifiable insofar as the so-called 'non-aggression axiom' is concerned, the very axiom that the branch of libertarianism I am familiar with is based upon (I am excluding the possibility of a private military/defense force for illustrative purposes).

So, it's plausible that the U.S. is blown off the map by sticking to Libertarian principle. That's right, my nonexistent white culture: gone, along with all my buddies and family members.

Clearly here, it would pay, like it would with immigration above, to be a pragmatist, at least in the short run. The question is this: Even if we know as a metaphysical certitude that immigrants from country X are going to use the ballot box and the welfare state to expropriate our property and convert our kids to baby-vacuuming atheists and thus ruin our society, should we then step in and violate the initial axiom by fighting against immigration, or should we focus our efforts on the welfare state and the ballot box as such?

I do not condone Mr. Greenspan, as I hate the Fed with every bone in my body.

But I understand. It is a difficult decision to make.