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...
So it's come to this. Fat asses now walk and call it running. Oh, I just invented a new exercise, it's called weightlifting. All you do is sit in front of the tv and eat snacks, presto!
ReplyDeleteYes, funny comment, except the evidence shows that run/walking is BETTER FOR YOU than just running.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I was shouting. Because it's come to this. Dumbasses write posts about articles without even bothering to read them and it's called 'commenting." Presto!
Isn't that the idea behind 'interval training'?
ReplyDeleteYep, just so.
ReplyDeleteMy bad, I didn't realize that an article written by some hack at the New York Times who "interviewed several people" counted as evidence. Carry on.
ReplyDelete