Results 1 to 20 of 64
Libertarian vieuw on property
You can't be an anarchist because egalitarianism is an authoritarian ideology.
edit:
Split from this thread http://www.revleft.com/vb/subject-un...16#post2376716
Last edited by PhoenixAsh; 7th March 2012 at 17:32.
Really? Want to try and argue how an ideological perspective that no human being is unequal in fundamental worth or social status could be considered authoritarian as opposed to any other form of political thought? And specifically how this relates to authoritarianism which is stating the opposite of this? Because that would be fun.
I do however stongly suggest you create another thread to debate the subject.
HAHAHAHA good luck demonstrating that you dolt.
(i know you put me in your ignore list but i really could not resist.)
WHY kléber, WHY!!!!!!!
As opposed to private armies and private police forces protecting private property which is organized around a hierarchical system of production where one only has the theoretical freedom to piss in the streets and where telling your manager that your son was sick today leaves you free to starve.
If Kim Jong Il considered North Korea a corporation rather than a state would it be an anarcho-capitalist society? He's free to do as he pleases? And so is everyone else. If he's bad then they can organize against him.
What's the difference between a Pinkerton and police officer shooting at me?
“How in the hell could a man enjoy being awakened at 6:30 a.m. by an alarm clock, leap out of bed, dress, force-feed, shit, piss, brush teeth and hair, and fight traffic to get to a place where essentially you made lots of money for somebody else and were asked to be grateful for the opportunity to do so?” Charles Bukowski, Factotum
"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as 'right-to-work.' It provides no 'rights' and no 'works.' Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining... We demand this fraud be stopped." MLK
-fka Redbrother
The very act of making decisions requires energy and sustenance. In non-egalitarian systems like capitalism, the means of satisfying these basic requirements are privately owned by the bourgeoisie. This means that the bourgeoisie has a means of coercion to use against everyone else, and this is completely incompatible with anarchism. The only way to achieve anarchism is to abolish distinct social relations to production.Originally Posted by Night Ripper
You need energy and sustenance to even make decisions, and the bourgeoisie has exclusive control over the means of satisfying these needs (the means of production), so the bourgeoisie can force you into a minimum wage job if they want.Originally Posted by Night Ripper
The finite land area of the Earth (about 148300000 square feet) has already been partitioned off into private property. You can't just go find a plot of land and farm it because somebody else already already owns it.Originally Posted by Night Ripper
A hunter/gatherer?! Are you insane? The wild plants and animals that are the very subjects of hunting/gathering are constantly being eliminated by industrialisation! Most animals and plants are becoming a part of our wildlife parks. Your idea that everyone can become a farmer or a hunter/gatherer demonstrates that you are completely disconnected from reality.Originally Posted by Night Ripper
Not according to libertarian standards. A lot of the current claims would be considered unowned. You have to use land to own it.
How long must it be unused? A day? Good job eliminating savings.
Save a species, have ginger babies!
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth." ~Albert Einstein
OMG! A relative perception of property from a capitalist?!
Now I've seen everything..
So if you own a building and rent it out - ergo you don't use it - you can't own it? I agree.
So does ownership really exist then. If I leave my house for work does it belong to whoever sneaks in and steals my cheese?
“How in the hell could a man enjoy being awakened at 6:30 a.m. by an alarm clock, leap out of bed, dress, force-feed, shit, piss, brush teeth and hair, and fight traffic to get to a place where essentially you made lots of money for somebody else and were asked to be grateful for the opportunity to do so?” Charles Bukowski, Factotum
"In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as 'right-to-work.' It provides no 'rights' and no 'works.' Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining... We demand this fraud be stopped." MLK
-fka Redbrother
What counts as "use" from a libertarian perspective is a little different than that. After all, what if I want to study ecology? I build a fence around the land but I don't do anything to it, just record data. That's still using it even though I'm not touching it.
I study the earth, get off my property.
Night Ripper; you reject our basic philosophical premises and we reject yours, and when you understand this basic fact you will begin to realize the source of the "communication problem" To put it in concrete terms, I have a basic understanding of the libertarian perspective, but believe it to be manifestation of a class perspective which I reject.
You can only homestead unowned property.
What do you mean "use"? Most landowners are going to claim that they use their land in some way.Originally Posted by Night Ripper
The homestead principle is totally arbitrary, its basically just made up, also when your done "using" something, what principle is there that you still have exclusive rights to it? Its totally arbitrary, its as valid as royalty having "divine right."
No no, this is different.
You see. America is one nation under God, and if you don't believe in private property, you're going to hell!
this message was brought to you by the CATO institute. CATO, always fair to the exploiting class
With enough guns, you can homestead owned property.
Property rights are completely arbitrary.
Imagine a boot stamping on a human face forever, saying:
"I KNOW YOU FEEL UPSET RE STAMPING, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM STRUCTURAL OPPRESSION"
Btw Egalatarianism is not an ideology.
Are you nuts??? I'm not an anarchist, but even I can see that egalitarianism by definition means that all members of society have an "equal footing", if you will. Authoritarianism implies something quite different. It's like saying that Yellow is Purple.
Now I'm sure that noone can seriously take a view that is so obviously flawed as this, so I don't see how you can be anything but a troll.
Da Fok?
