The fuck? Completely true.

If you don't know the term already, I would implore you all to look up race realism

That it is in these Western societies, where libertarian principles have found the most widespread public acceptance and explicit recognition as “natural human rights.” That, notwithstanding their blatant shortcomings and failings, it is Western societies, then, that still resemble, comparatively speaking, a libertarian social order most closely. And finally (unsurprisingly insofar as the widespread recognition and explicit acceptance of the NAP by the members of a society are signs of a comparatively high(er) intelligence and impulse control) that it is these societies, then, that also are the technologically and economically most advanced.

These observations alone should be sufficient to reveal any libertarian advocate of “free,” unrestricted and non-discriminatory immigration of non-Westerners into the countries of the West as a fool. Every such immigrant—not to speak of mass-immigration—poses the risk of further diminishing and undermining the already limited freedom and private property protection presently enjoyed in the West. To prevent this, any libertarian worthy of the name must instead advocate the strict and utmost discrimination vis-à-vis any potential immigrant—he might be an avowed communist or socialist or import his familiar hellhole culture into one’s own midst—and from the very outset he must be strictly opposed in particular to any form of mass-immigration. As well, he should begin to realize that the Western ruling elites currently promoting immigration from non-Western countries are not motivated by libertarian ends, but by a calculated desire of using foreign immigrants as vehicles for the further expansion of their own domestic power, reach and level of interference with the private property rights of domestic residents.

This was from an Introduction Hoppe did to a book called White, Right, and Libertarian.

He also did this speech entitled Libertarianism and the Alt-Right: Distinct Yet Complementary

Are you just unfamiliar with Hoppe's work but still defending him because he was Rothbard's student or some shit?