Difference between revisions of "What Is Property?"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
Claims and possession are sometimes considered by coercive social organizations such as governments to determine who owns particular property, but they are not necessary. For example, governments have granted lands to colonies and businesses such as railroads without claims or possession by the colonies or businesses. Gifts and inheritances can be made without claims or possession by the recipients. Just or not, those are facts of history and daily life. | Claims and possession are sometimes considered by coercive social organizations such as governments to determine who owns particular property, but they are not necessary. For example, governments have granted lands to colonies and businesses such as railroads without claims or possession by the colonies or businesses. Gifts and inheritances can be made without claims or possession by the recipients. Just or not, those are facts of history and daily life. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Wait! The Non-Aggression Axiom says that retaliatory force is not coercion!== | ||
| + | The "non-aggression axiom" specifically exempts use of force to punish or deter violators of rights claims, calling it "retaliatory". Justifying coercion by calling it retaliatory force does not make it any less coercion. In other words, they say it's not coercive only because they are in favor of it. Sorry, aiming guns at people is coercive no matter what your justification. | ||
| + | |||
| + | For more on this subject see: [[Non-Aggression]]. | ||
==What about Locke and Mixing of Labor?== | ==What about Locke and Mixing of Labor?== | ||
| Line 100: | Line 105: | ||
==What about self-ownership?== | ==What about self-ownership?== | ||
| + | |||
| + | No human society has ever treated people as their own inviolate property. Even if self-ownership was only an aspirational goal, it could not be implemented for children or incompetents. Historically, ownership of other people (slavery, wives, children) has been the norm. Libertarians frequently base their philosophy on this imagined right. It is merely an unenforced claim. You might also be in possession of yourself, but there is a long history of others being in possession of people's bodies. | ||
| + | |||
| + | If you have anything resembling ownership of your body, it is a result of rights created by government or other coercive social organizations. But they are never full liberal ownership because there are always important exceptions (resembling easements) having to do with the duties of citizenship and the facts of competency. | ||
==What about Intellectual Property such as Patents and Copyrights?== | ==What about Intellectual Property such as Patents and Copyrights?== | ||
