Good piece but I'd argue that property is violence, since it is only yours as long as you can defend it. Most people get along and cooperate, and a cup of coffee is hardly worth the risk for a criminal, but if you were holding a kilo of pure gold instead of coffee someone would conk you over the head rather quickly. The more tempting the property the more force or threat of force required to defend it. Not all property is acquired by violence but nearly all of it is retained by violence.
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
I think that property is not violence, as violence is the tool with which you protect your property. This tool may never be needed, therefore it is not the defining characteristic of property, from my view.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Agreed. I think ancoms and other leftists try to portray property as violence as if it were an aggression against them when the overwhelming majority of property has been acquired justly. It is still representative of both what you can earn and defend (or police defend on your behalf).
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit