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...
Considering that I drank kava from a communal bowl in Fiji, yes, I probably would. Bula!
ReplyDeleteI sure do. Some salty snacks while having a drink? Yum!
ReplyDeleteEspecially when a good buzz kicks in. Haha.
ReplyDeleteI guess I haven't been to a bar in America in too long. Do they not do that any more here?
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. I rely on a mixture of stomach acid and alcohol to kill any nasties, and my immune system to take care of any that make it through.
ReplyDeleteTom, I don't think you can do that legally in NYC -- a bar near me had a barrel of peanuts for a while, and the Health Department made them get rid of it. But health laws are mostly local, so there may be plenty of places that still do this.
ReplyDelete