Solutions to Europe's Muslim problem without violating the NAP?

[Cruiser]

Hello,

 

Even if we made a Libertarian argument against open borders it wouldn't solve much. Europe's unintegrated Muslim communities are already established in Europe. 

The majority of Jihadists who attacked Europe wore born in Europe and have European citizenship. Statist's propose solutions like massive deportations, striping people of their citizenship and the banning of a whole religion which would violate the NAP.

 

I know we could abolish the welfare state but it's going to have a massive fallout. Every Muslim demographic in Europe even Turks have the highest welfare consumption compared to other demographics. They'll be committing massive amounts of violence against the natives. Look at France for example, they wanted to adopted some controversial Labour law which resulted in Muslims rioting and burning vehicles.

 

Another Libertarian solution would be to change self defense and gun ownership laws in Europe so Europeans don't have to rely on the State for protections. That's all I could think of.

 

Ether way, I feel when Europe's Muslim problem worsens, people will get desperate and transfer more power to the government. The far right isn't the solution, have a look at their manifesto and you'll see they're even worse than mainstream parties.

 

Guys, what are your Libertarian solutions to Europe's Muslim problem?

[thebeardslastcall]

Without violating the NAP? The problem exists because of violations of the NAP. You solve the problem by stopping the violations of the NAP. Stopping someone from murdering you is self defense, even if you have to kill them to do it. If someone is trying to kill you, they've rejected property rights and right to life as a standard and thus defending yourself by hurting them is no violation of their standards and is perfectly justified.  Denying someone the right to self defense is an NAP violation. People need to stop giving property rights to thieves and calling that libertarian or an adherence to the NAP.

[myclippedwings]

Without violating the NAP? The problem exists because of violations of the NAP. You solve the problem by stopping the violations of the NAP. Stopping someone from murdering you is self defense, even if you have to kill them to do it. If someone is trying to kill you, they've rejected property rights and right to life as a standard and thus defending yourself by hurting them is no violation of their standards and is perfectly justified.  Denying someone the right to self defense is an NAP violation. People need to stop giving property rights to thieves and calling that libertarian or an adherence to the NAP.

 

Perfect answer pretty much.

 

Also, I think cutting welfare is the best option, I mean, yes people will riot and commit violence, but they won't be able to sustain wasting their time and energy rioting and committing violence for long without free money??

 

So people will eventually give up and just accept the welfare cuts?

[Wuzzums]

For starters you can change your facebook avatar to this:

[Donnadogsoth]

Statist's propose solutions like massive deportations, striping people of their citizenship and the banning of a whole religion which would violate the NAP.

 

Guys, what are your Libertarian solutions to Europe's Muslim problem?

 

Hi Cruiser,

 

Massive immigration, forced citizenship and the importation of an alien and hostile religion are already enormous violations of the NAP.  Even if we view it as impinging merely on "the commons" those commons represent the collective property, as yet to be properly divided, of the native population.  Mass deportation, stripping people of citizenship, and the banning of pernicious religions are within the scope of the NAP.  If anyone thinks this is "Statist" all they need do is imagine that a freely-assented-to task force with the powers of an army is created to deal with the Moslem incursions.

 

If we deny this, then we admit that "libertarianism" is hopelessly mired in small-scale thinking and will never attain to a grand strategy for dealing with those who certainly have a grand strategy for dealing with us.

[DaveR]

I would say ostracism of people practicing totalitarian ideologies like Islam, but people are too lazy. The local (muslim administered) curry house near me has been raided several times for employing illegal immigrants, and temporarily shut down for health and safety violations. Still native Britons go there. 

[DaviesMa]

As per the other commentors, withdrawing welfare whilst offering travel and resettlement in other countries could be the answer but if this were government controlled then this would be another violation of the NAP from taking from Tax Payers.

 

Muslims in the Uk for example earn on average 68% as much as the average UK person with almost half of British Muslims residing in the bottom 10% of districts for deprivation. 35% of Muslim households have no adults working compared to 17% of the general population in the UK.

 

Being welfare dependent would mean that an offer of a relocation package for renouncing citizenship and a transfer to another country might appeal to many Muslims.

 

As someone who has lived across different towns and cities in the UK with significant Muslim populations, it is hard to see integration working as they are heavily ghettoised, even with small populations.

[KeepOnGoing]

Close the borders, leave the EU, get rid of welfare, deport criminals. I don't think the government will do much to protect their citizens (to solve the problem) so there will be a civil war. People will have to fix it. The far right is too far (many of the organizations praise Nazis) and there is no way they will get many followers. I think there will be something in between, that will attract the masses. Without masses you will not fix this problem and before getting better it will get worse. Worse enough for the people, regular citizens, fathers and husbands to get their hands dirty.

[ClearConscience]

I'm just going to plop this here.  The solution to the "Muslim problem" is to be firm in your convictions.  Any Muslim that lives in western society is going to feel uncomfortable, especially Muslim women.  Don't cowtow to their reactions to your culture.  The French are AGGRESSIVELY taking this perspective - to the point where they're actually denying individual liberty.  I'm not advocating BANNING Muslim culture, to that regard, but never give any of your freedoms by virtue of "religious tolerance"... ever.

That's the point.  Allow people to do their own thing how they see fit, but be mindful of the underground group of people who want to enforce their ideas on you, and attack them hard.  Be ruthless.  France is being ruthless as fuck, surprisingly.  This is France.  Westerners think of France is being passive.  They're not being passive at all in this regard.  That's what you have to do, in the face of a religion that has its roots in intolerance.  Sharia law is not your law, and if they want a government that enforces it, then they can go someplace else.

Maybe Muslims need their own Israel.  That is the Westerner's solution to strict Judaism, is it not?  Perhaps Islam needs its own place CALLED MECCA, Saudi Arabia, where they can have their Sharia Law and live in that society that they see fit.  But if those "diaspora" Muslims think they can invade another culture and institute their own rules, as a nation, we all need to stand up and say that this is not your home.  It is your home, if and only if, you agree that tolerance is a virtue, and that people have the RIGHT to be immoral on this planet.

If Allah allows for immorality on this planet, then institutionalized governments should allow for immorality on this planet.  That's the principle.  That's the winning argument with Muslims, and Christians, and Jews.  God doesn't smite gays, and sexual deviants, and people who commit thought crimes, and those who endorse evil in this world.  The role of government is to punish people who attack others, to ensure that you can live in peace, to defend you from invasions, to increase societal well-being, and to provide the greatest amount of individual freedom as humanly possible.  The end.  That's the purpose of government in western society.  And any statute that opposes these aims will be aggressively opposed.

[FreedomPhilosophy]

Properly protecting male infants from circumcision would compel a lot of Muslims to avoid settling in the West.

 

This could be done softly by offering adult children access to remedy by tort, or tougher by allowing anyone who sees a circumcised child the opportunity to seek legal redress on the child's behalf.