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 bet he was just a close Ron Paul supporter, and Paul asked him to do this bombing, survive and pretend later on that he did it because of US foreign policy to lend the ludicrous non-sequitur theory of blow-back some credibility...
ReplyDeleteRegarding your island example I have to admit that I misunderstood your example to a certain degree or better said in what direction the argument is used. I apologize. I dismissed that approach because I thought and still think it is the wrong way to look at it, and is neither analogous of what happened in the past and even if then it would still not justify any of the policies favored by Keynesians.
Though I have to become clearer about that and when I have finally made up my mind about this and feel that I can express it accordingly I will get back to you. Else you were just right!