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,
ReplyDeleteBob is going to be on a live internet radio show at 8pm eastern today, here is the link:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/insanegovernment/2011/11/18/insane-government-with-guest-robert-p-murphy
I just figured that you might be interested. Maybe he'll actually mention something. Either way, he probably just forgot to renew his domain name or something like that (I hope).
Thanks!
ReplyDeleteI actually found this by accident. I was trying to search google to find out what happened to his blog.
ReplyDelete