RE: Property rights exist because we have morality

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Property rights exist because we have morality

in philosophy •  7 years ago 

Sorry about the late reply. Could you please define what you mean by "rule by force"? What do you propose be done before "rule by force" is off the table?

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!
Sort Order:  

Rule by force is the first lesson we learn in life.
Do what you are told or the big people get all loud and scary.

When we stop living out that first lesson in life we will know freedom.

Currently, there are plenty of enforced rules, do I need to elaborate?

Well, do you think there is any difference between forcing someone to pay taxes and "forcing" someone to stop stealing from you?

And I repeat my question, what do you propose be done before "rule by force" is off the table?

Well, do you think there is any difference between forcing someone to pay taxes and "forcing" someone to stop stealing from you?

Both are stealing, self defense is not initiating violence.

And I repeat my question, what do you propose be done before "rule by force" is off the table?

I propose that we all resist in the way that makes us happy.

Some people will garden,....

So, did I understand correctly that you believe that people have a right to defend their property?

Resisting force by gardening? Do you mean as in being outside the tax system and growing your own food?

you believe that people have a right to defend their property?

Personal property, yes.
Corporate property under the current oppression by corporations, no.
Public property belongs to the public.

Resisting force by gardening?

Well, that isn't what I chose, but everybody is free to resist in whatever way makes them happy.

@marcstevens does it in traffic court and tax hearings.

Okay, I agree that corporate property and corporations should not exist. They are government created entities that shield the owners from personal responsibility. However, I don't believe public property is a good idea. Mainly because it is unclear how owns it. Is it some politician? You also get the tragedy of the commons.

When you say personal property, am I correct in assuming that you distinguish it from private property? In the sense that one is allowed to own an arbitrary amount? Maybe you can answer the questions I posted here? https://steemit.com/philosophy/@pomperipossa/so-you-re-an-anarchist

I don't get too wrapped up in debates about definitions, so, your stuff is your's, nobody should take it from you.

However, if you abandon it, whoever picks it up and uses it now owns it.
For instance,

If the workers of the world united and managed things without bosses or shareholders, why would they construct new factories when a perfectly good one is sitting idle because it's owners can't run it by themselves?
Would we need to wait for new delivery of trucks because all the one's that Walmart owns are idle?

Cooperation is the order of the day, how do we work together for a better world?

Hmm, how is it abandoning your factory if the employees suddenly say "we have united so it's our factory now." How is this different than "the food you were about to eat is mine now"?