Some fantastic imagination you have straight out of a science fiction novel, So you think that given true freedom and equality that then tyrannical slavery would be popular with the slaves and slave owners? I am suprised you don't think we need a government to protect us from this, so whats your idea again? That someone should be allowed to erect a shitter outside my bedroom window?
Holy strawboy Batman!
So there will be some sort of grand conspiracy in which all evil people will band together happily being evil together but not towards one another, and take over all 95% of the land currently owned by the U.S government in which they will be CAPABLE of inflicting a tyrannical rule universally spread throughout accepted by all people which is somehow morally and ethically correct and not in violation of the non-agression principle. I just don't see the stars aligning so create such an intrinsically crafted conspiracy against all of mankind. oh wait there is that thing we call the state...
Several days ago I was driving in Tijuana. I was near the line to get across the border and I was trying to get two lanes over in order to make a left turn at an intersection. The first of these two lanes, was full of cars waiting to cross the road to get toward the border waiting line. I must have waited 10 minutes to get into that lane and not a single motorist was willing to allow me to get in. One could almost say they were conspiring against me to keep me from getting where I was going. Our society is competitive.So there will be some sort of grand conspiracy in which all evil people will band together and take over all 95% of the land currently owned by the U.S government in which they will be CAPABLE of inflicting a tyranical rule universally spread throughout accepted by all people which is somehow morally and ethically correct and not in violation of the non-agression principle. I just don't see the stars aligning so create such an intrinsically crafted conspiracy against all of mankind. oh wait there is that thing we call the state...
So unless you want to detail specifically what your suggesting to combat this grand conspiracy this conversation is at a dead end.
Again so what do you suggest ? Where is the line drawn on property rights? I am being straight with you and your the one just dancing here. Lets take your suggestion and discuss how it can be practically applied.
So you can only argue in defense of the ideology you prefer, but when you run out of arguments, you resort to fear mongering. When that fails, you ask me to define my ideology by saying I am dancing when I have stayed true to the title of the thread from the beginning.
You can't explain where the line in property rights should be drawn. I am not asking much, think you got it backwards who is backed into the corner here. Yes all you can do is dance around instead of answer a simple question and continue the discussion, yet another dead end conversation with you where you pretend you are being open minded, I would like to discuss property rights with you because this is a discussion that you brought up but you won't have it. Voluntarism is clearly not feudalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feudalism Feudalism was a set of legal and military customs in medieval Europe that flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries, which, broadly defined, was a system for structuring society around relationships derived from the holding of land in exchange for service or labour.)
You're asking me to define or declare property rights. I'm not pushing anything. I'm challenging models, not selling anything.
You're asking me to define or declare property rights. I'm not pushing anything. I'm challenging models, not selling anything.
I'm clearly not. Just challenging feudalism.
Your "Challenge" to property rights (which you have given the big bad scary word feudalism)....You can't even explain lol
Challenged.I agree. I wouldn't call it a sticking point, I would call it a point that needs to be focused upon in order to progress. Differentiate private property from personal property. Land is not personal property.
Take note of the fact that one must despise the people around themselves in order to wish to own personal land and deprive others of the right to it. He then says, "you can't force me to join some commune". This language is extremely hateful, it is saying that you just want to be alone, separate from the human race, that this is the only way to be happy. The real theft, is when one guy says, "fuck the tribe, I'm going to go over here, and take this land, and nobody may trespass on it."
If someone is truly trying to steal the sustenance that you and your ilk labor and toil the land in order to provide, or burn your crops, it is a community that will protect you. At the very heart of capitalism is greed, for greed is rewarded by it. The individual is all that is important, other people are then seen as somehow representative of theft. Join the human race.
You want to move onto alternatives with out admitting that feudalism sucks.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CEQQFjAC&url=http://mises.org/journals/jls/19_2/19_2_1.pdf&ei=ZTYHUaa7NYPJyAGk3oGwCA&usg=AFQjCNFB7vIAwAnLzf5qP7E6ZzfdpWHGZg&sig2=8mGqKiwKgbds-jR9EtoWJw&bvm=bv.41524429,d.aWc&cad=rjaCommon Property in anarcho capatilism pdf said:
I have read Holcombe's paper, you're pasting very selectively from a tenuous theoretical source which is stating that "free market" motives can do better what government does. You are using this as your source to insist that property held in commons is a concept compatible with anarchocapitalism. This paper describes how they can come to be, not how they could be controlled and maintained and this is very telling. They cannot. They are simply consolidated and absorbed and then passed in heredity.