I decided to move some discussion from this post up to the top level here. Specifically, Watoosh wrote: "Well, if violence is defined as initiation of force (which, of course, presupposes certain property rights), then I think Rockwell is correct..." Well, if we define cats as elephants, then many people keep elephants in their house. More seriously, firstly, violence is not usually defined that way. It's defined as, you know, violence, so that, say, someone may respond violently or non-violently to someone who aggresses against them. Otherwise, it would make no sense to say, for instance, "He punched me, but I did not stoop to violence in response." And, secondly, the libertarian usage of "initiation of force" is very offbeat. If I wander onto someone's meadow, most people would not say I had "initiated force" -- I mean, sure, I used "force" against the earth to push off walking, but that's not force directed against...
A person should actually have a position prior to requesting a sabbatical.
ReplyDeleteBut, with that said, there are people who earn a living by developing and testing online games. They pay real money, ie, public fiat currency. Give it some thought?
I love the person who in post A says, "These games are about murder, so there is no market involved," and then, when someone corrects him and says they are about hunting, says, "Well, I don't know anything about them."
ReplyDeleteThat's a good reason to shut up, isn't it?
That's a good reason to shut up, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteWell, I see your point, but if we followed that policy, Crash Landing would go bust.
Bob, you've been skating on thin ice for a while, buddy...
ReplyDelete