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...
Just don't drink it!
ReplyDeleteYou are right of course but I think it's more the fault of the hotel or the caterer. So you should probably direct your ire to them.
ReplyDeleteI think I have seen once in a while where they use a Sterno fire thingie under the water to keep it near boiling. But you're right, usually they just put out a bin of "hot water" and that is disgusting.
As in all cases, I prefer to direct my ire at you.
Delete