In ancapistan, if you have no property, you have no rights
Ancaps often declare, "All rights are property rights." I was thinking about this the other day, in the context of running into libertarians online who insisted that libertarianism supports "the freedom of movement," and realized that this principle actually entails that people without property have no rights at all, let alone any right to "freedom of movement." Of course, immediately, any ancap readers still left here are going to say, "Wait a second! Everyone owns his own body! And so everyone at least has the right to not have his body interfered with." Well, that is true... except that in ancapistan, one has no right to any place to put that body, except if one owns property, or has the permission of at least one property owner to place that body on her land. So, if one is landless and penniless, one had sure better hope that there are kindly disposed property owners aligned in a corridor from wherever one happens to be to wherever the...
I agree that it was a blunder, but unfortunately it was not a political one.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the implications of the statement "There's no nice way to wage a counterinsurgency."
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2011/03/libya-nadir-achieved.html
Afghanistan seems to be a very important geostrategic point. I fear there are other reasons the US is there for so long.
ReplyDelete- It is a possible transit country for pipe lines
- It is rich in various natural recourses
- It really confuses me that since US occupation drug production has increased big time there. How is that possible? Really fishy...
- They installed a corrupt government
- And it is next to Iran
I think humanitarian reasons are not really an issue, so I am not sure if you can call it a "mistake"...