Difference between revisions of "Initiation of Force"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Libertarian Propaganda Terms]] | [[Category:Libertarian Propaganda Terms]] | ||
| − | + | {{DES | des = All [[property]] and indeed all real [[rights]] are based on violence, [[coercion]], initiation of force. Libertarians claim there is an invisible right to property which magically exempts property from being intrinsically violent. In other words, they deceptively hide the violence they like as a made-up "right". }} | |
| − | {{DES | des = | + | |
| + | The problem with the “initiation of force” arguments of libertarians is that they boil down to “Uses of force that we like are retaliation; anything we don’t like is initiation of force.” Humpty Dumpty couldn’t have said it better himself when he pays words extra to mean what he wants. | ||
| + | |||
| + | For example, libertarians also consider fraud to be initiation of force. There is no individual right to be free of fraud: remember "let the buyer beware"? Or do should we make up that right too? | ||
| + | |||
| + | Libertarianism does not shun violence at all: it just calls it retaliation. If a starving man starts to peacefully eat fruit from a libertarian's tree, a libertarian can violently attack him screaming “My property! Mine!” | ||
| + | |||
| + | Real rights, such as legal property rights, do not attempt to conceal the violence: they have obvious means of enforcement. Philosophical twaddle from Ayn Rand can't hide this simple fact about real life. Which is why "initiation of force" (her term) is deceptive. | ||
