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...
No, because only homo sapiens have government ownership of roads.
ReplyDeleteUh oh, do you still believe in the libertarian critique of price ceilings, Gene?
Yes, I've also often stood in line to get concert tickets or to get into a show. And that is because only homo sapiens have government ownership of all bands and concert venues.
ReplyDeleteYou walked into that one Bob...
ReplyDeleteTo be fair to Bob, I have no doubt that the legal-political character of most roads is a factor in their being all clogged up. But I was just trying to comment on something odd about humans. We don't need to make everything political now, do we?
ReplyDelete