Migration Into the American Sailboat

The sailboat case is not far-fetched. As I pointed out, the abortion case resembles it although abortion has more complex features. Most of us will say that it’s wrong to toss the girl back into the ocean, but libertarian legalism does not encompass any more than finding the implications of absolute property ownership. It doesn’t say that we should keep the girl aboard or toss her back. It says that the decision is up to the owners of the property. Libertarian law is not a moral theory that tells us how to behave in all circumstances and doesn’t pretend to be; but it is an ethics of liberty. What it accomplishes is to emphasize what a strong defense of property rights entails, which means a strong defense of human freedom. If we want to know how to behave or how we should behave on our property and with it, then we need some other ethical principles to inform our consciences.

Another case that resembles the sailboat case is human migration from one place, one country, to another country. The destination country is one big sailboat or refuge. America the country is a sailboat for Central Americans, say.

Migration then fosters an argument. Open border voices may argue that a state’s borders are arbitrary and coercive, that they hinder the right of a human being to migrate freely and non-aggressively in order to survive. Controlled-border voices may argue that the sailboat-country is owned by its citizens and they have a right to exclude migrants or admit them on terms of their own design.

The Best of Michael S. Rozeff