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...
I see it as some sort of mental affliction, can't quite tell if it is yet an identifiable disease. I love info and whatnot, but one cannot help but notice that everybody around them has their face in their phone.
ReplyDeleteHow's Tom?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEscuse me, who's Tom?
ReplyDeleteKnapp. He once asserted here that only 1% of Americans did anything with their phones other than make calls.
ReplyDelete?! Does he live by himself in a log cabin in the deep Poconos?
DeleteClose: Arkansas.
DeleteIt's awful, isn't it? To paraphrase you, it's like something out of a Phil Dick novel. I'm not being sarcastic. But it is ironic, that I'm typing this from my galaxy S4.
ReplyDelete