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...
Take away his cube root?
ReplyDeleteToss him a copy of Human Action?
ReplyDeleteWave at him.
ReplyDeleteThat's what I thought at first, but by your description I was picturing him sitting on a branch. After all, when I house-sit for someone, I don't hang from the chandelier.
ReplyDeleteEven sitting on a branch, a normal Polish person holds on for safety. Suddenly remove that hold, and he'll probably tip off.
ReplyDeleteHaving no access to Polish persons, I tried this with orangutans, letting them perch in trees and then blowing off an arm with a high-velocity bullet. They all fell off, though some succeeded in catching a lower branch with the remaining arm. When I blew that one off, they invariably fell to the ground, despite efforts to catch hold with their feet.