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...
Gene,
ReplyDeleteYou've already written one novel, right? So all you have to do is write a second, third, and forth one between now and July, and you'll be eligible.
Well, I need to really rush, because it's July, 2009.
ReplyDeleteApparently, they wanted to give an award to some guy who was going to give a talk at St. Francis, and he had just published his fourth book, so it was a good way to direct the award his way.
Like the "help wanted: engineer" ads that detail desired experience and education so precisely that -what do you know?! only one person in the world fits.
ReplyDeleteThey used to have a lot of those in the detroit papers. Back in the days of help wanted ads and automotive engineers.
Like the "help wanted: engineer" ads that detail desired experience and education so precisely that -what do you know?! only one person in the world fits.
ReplyDeleteThey used to have a lot of those in the detroit papers. Back in the days of help wanted ads and automotive engineers.
Argosy, I believe that profession still exists in Japan and Korea.
ReplyDelete