tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post7031761294050905398..comments2024-03-28T09:59:13.754-07:00Comments on bionic mosquito: Liberté sans Fraternité?bionic mosquitohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-34528867907428819462017-05-10T13:47:25.293-07:002017-05-10T13:47:25.293-07:00No, I still have no real idea where you're goi...No, I still have no real idea where you're going. I can't even begin to concern myself with the claim that BM rejects individual property ownership as a foundation for society now that you've thrown out the most prominent libertarian theories on property. <br /><br /><br />"Argumentation BS"? <br /><br />This whole paragraph is where my attention is. I don't see how we could ever discuss broader topics until I understand you here. Could you link to Tucker's argument against Hoppe's argumentation ethics and also realize I'm not going to reread Hoppe's lecture. I've heard it, and I'd be willing to engage discussion on pointed arguments, not the whole document. <br /><br />But really I'm just responding to say I tried to follow you. I'd still be interested to see where your thoughts come from and go. But I'm not here to argue.P Szarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09298180391605451618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-88815063424464568222017-05-09T07:51:17.445-07:002017-05-09T07:51:17.445-07:00They are insane in the sense that they expect a re...They are insane in the sense that they expect a result that will not be forthcoming; it is more like extremely flawed [some times] analysis and conclusions.<br />American governance is an outside force attempting to force virtue.<br />Insanity, going mad -- what I am talking about is that loss in mind faculties.<br />Search: long term effect of isolation<br />Search; solitary confinementJaimeInTexashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08729407700850451849noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-25732386319666251022017-05-08T09:01:36.096-07:002017-05-08T09:01:36.096-07:00There are several ideas involved in the quoted com...There are several ideas involved in the quoted comment. Most of what is there should be clear from the surrounding context. I will attempt to offer clarification on a couple points.<br /><br />My assertion is that under current conditions, (1) there is no reasonable and well-know/agreed upon definition of justifiably owned property, (2) the result is that most individuals have been completely dispossessed of both themselves and all other real/physical property, (3) the exercise of property ownership that does take place is essentially equivalent to slavery---the rulers own all other individuals (especially the productive ones) and all that which those individuals use and produce, i.e., you have the same situation which the king made explicit, and finally (4) that ownership is not justified, i.e., it is as illegitimate for the current rulers as it was for the king.<br /><br />Thus, "no property" is at the heart of the problem faced by anyone who wants to be free. One needs to take it upon one's self to determine what it means to own property and do what is necessary to do that. <br /><br />Many libertarians think the definition of property is settled. BM is one such person, hence my assertion the he rejects the suggestion of property ownership. He says he "knows what is his," which of course is no real answer and leads to absurd assertions like you'll find in his most recent blurb where he claims to "own" state controlled property. (https://lewrockwell.com/2017/05/bionic-mosquito/non-aggression-essential/)<br /><br />At least Hoppe, Rand, Rothbard, Mises and others had the insight to recognize that a definition of property is required, i.e., a foundation for what constitutes property. Jeffrey Tucker (just to quote someone who is a bit better known than I) who recently pointed out in a not so well publicized lecture that all the stuff they wrote constituted absolutely nothing on the subject. In any case, Tucker is correct. I doubt he's going to get to his desired notion of property using the approach of "emergent norm" which he has inherited from Rothbard et al, but nevertheless, he is correct that there is no foundation---and that is a BIG problem.<br /><br />As a final comment, you can have a look at Hoppe's definition/foundation for property.<br /><br />https://lewrockwell.com/2017/04/hans-hermann-hoppe/world-government-vs-freedom-civilization/<br /><br />It is interesting that he backs up each of his characteristics simply by saying that any alternative is absurd. This, of course, comes from Hoppe's bogus argumentation BS, so he can just say any nonsense and then cap of his nonsense with the assertion that to disagree with him is a contradiction. (It's really pretty funny for a guy who otherwise seems pretty sensible.) In any case, Hoppe's foundation for property is clearly nonsense which will be obvious if you think about it a little bit, as Tucker also points out.<br /><br />BM and I have had this discussion before, so I hope I've explained "where it comes from." In any case, I think I've clarified what I can.Sonja Cramernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-64251127745534246632017-05-07T15:03:17.305-07:002017-05-07T15:03:17.305-07:00It was probably something that you said that broug...It was probably something that you said that brought them to the realization they they are not really libertarians, nor are they interested in giving up their statism. I have been accused by many of being too harsh or direct. I don't worry about it because I started out as a part of the libertarian minority and I doubt that I'll ever open a closed mind that wants to stay closed. I just refer them to the Advocates for Self-Government's World's Smallest Political Quiz and let them figure out where they are on the Diamond Chart instead of trying to convince them. theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.phpvonuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453683079174884419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-75080456847136537872017-05-07T14:31:40.414-07:002017-05-07T14:31:40.414-07:00Is it something I said?
It never fails - just as ...Is it something I said?<br /><br />It never fails - just as we are getting to the root of the issues, those with a different view who decide to engage on this topic just cut off the conversation. And, even worse, it is often after I write my most extensive reply.<br /><br />What am I to think? Perhaps I am too harsh or direct.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-6636607049677769022017-05-07T12:02:24.508-07:002017-05-07T12:02:24.508-07:00BM, thank you for the civil back and forward in th...BM, thank you for the civil back and forward in this comments section. I have enjoyed it, and have a much better appreciation for the divergence in views on this topic.The NAPsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631781625841157567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-80631494813895320512017-05-07T08:04:17.663-07:002017-05-07T08:04:17.663-07:00I offer my reply here:
http://bionicmosquito.blog...I offer my reply here:<br /><br />http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2017/05/nap-time.html <br /><br />It was getting lengthy, and I wanted to address several aspects of your comment. So I started with a new post.<br /><br />If you care to continue the dialogue, we can do so there.<br />bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-58975110783886061652017-05-06T18:50:04.457-07:002017-05-06T18:50:04.457-07:00If one is to take a deontological as opposed to a ...If one is to take a deontological as opposed to a consequentialist position, shouldn't a libertarian just concern himself with advocating for policies that move us towards greater respect for private property rights? If so, how can we reconcile that with worrying about what might happen if we reject the state's legitimacy in every sphere, including border control?<br /><br />If one is to argue from a consequentialist position, aren't you making some very broad generalizations when you talk about "common culture"? It sounds a lot like the objectionable "common good" or "public interest" that statists are so fond of using to justify state action in other areas. In a country of over 300 million people, couldn't "culture" (or simply a desire to associate) be more local, down to the private property owner's household? What if a household of culture A wants to bring in others from that culture (or from culture X), and a household of culture B wants to bring in others from that culture (or from culture Y)? Who is to say that one is allowable and one is not? In addition to being an illegitimate entity, the state is a very blunt instrument, imposing a one-size-fits-all policy.<br /><br />The citizen/non-citizen distinction is purely a fiction of the state, so why should a libertarian buy into that concept? Many of your wish-list items are pro-private property rights, but then you leap to "common culture." What if the citizen-sponsors are my two households mentioned above?The NAPsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631781625841157567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-37032659263937810912017-05-06T17:27:59.356-07:002017-05-06T17:27:59.356-07:00I will also add: just because the state controls t...I will also add: just because the state controls the property does not mean it is unowned - this aspect of my earlier response should not be neglected.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-11818236667002050842017-05-06T17:26:02.507-07:002017-05-06T17:26:02.507-07:00There are un-libertarian aspects on both sides of ...There are un-libertarian aspects on both sides of this issue. So instead of advocating for open borders that will destroy culture and increase the role of the state, why not advocate for libertarian solutions that also enhance the possibility of liberty in the future? <br /><br />For example: being a citizen comes with privileges not available to the immigrant; go back to air travel as it was pre-911; stop all internal checkpoints; allow immigration only by private invitation from a citizen-sponsor – a job offer, and a place to live; hold the citizen-sponsor responsible for any financial support if necessary, such that the immigrant is not a burden to taxpayers; hold the citizen-sponsor liable for any breeches in behavior or conduct; respect the private property owner’s right to discriminate.<br /><br />All very libertarian; all designed to ensure the foundation of common culture that is beneficial toward keeping state-action tame.<br /><br />So why not advocate for these?<br />bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-72737041597765711892017-05-06T17:16:41.371-07:002017-05-06T17:16:41.371-07:00Aside from the fact that the vast majority of the ...Aside from the fact that the vast majority of the land that the federal government "owns" by controlling it is done in violation of Article 1 Section 8 Paragraph 17 of the Constitution, the illegals wouldn't be entering state-controlled property if the Constituion were enforced.vonuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453683079174884419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-3032119937694899592017-05-06T16:57:49.196-07:002017-05-06T16:57:49.196-07:00I wasn't looking for a libertarian answer. I ...I wasn't looking for a libertarian answer. I have been pondering your comments above (and some of your comments historically) that seem to indicate you believe there is something un-libertarian about advocating for "open borders" For example:<br /><br />"There is nothing close to this in today’s world – more so the opposite; immigration is subsidized, coerced, driven by state action. This is the “open borders” we are lectured to embrace.<br /><br />Culture change by force; subsidized by the victims. Nothing libertarian here."<br /><br />Couldn't one aspect of being an "open borders" libertarian simply be that you deny the legitimacy of any state action when it comes to admitting individuals to, or prohibiting them from entering, state-controlled property? That this is a principled objection to state action per se, even though the immediate consequences -- free movement into state-controlled property -- may not be favorable? <br /><br />At least some of those who are not "open borders" libertarians are, at a minimum, advocating for the state to act in accordance with their preferred policy. However, proposing that the state have such a role, and accepting that it will need to tax (and possibly use eminent domain) to carry out that role, could also be described as un-libertarian.The NAPsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631781625841157567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-25434786712350691832017-05-06T16:00:04.201-07:002017-05-06T16:00:04.201-07:00Since illegal immigrants are trespassing, they are...Since illegal immigrants are trespassing, they are violating the property rights of those lawfully occupying the property. As such, anyone knowing firsthand about the commission of a crime is in position to arrest the criminal. vonuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453683079174884419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-31076903515270508982017-05-06T15:32:30.837-07:002017-05-06T15:32:30.837-07:00NAPster
Your question presupposes a libertarian a...NAPster<br /><br />Your question presupposes a libertarian answer exists regarding this topic. My earlier answers to your earlier questions should make clear that I do not believe this to be the case.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-2687601338611870082017-05-06T13:05:24.585-07:002017-05-06T13:05:24.585-07:00"It is my opinion that one central component ..."It is my opinion that one central component of such a foundation must be individual property ownership---an idea you reject."<br /><br />What? Where did that come from?P Szarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09298180391605451618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-1657621857949058592017-05-06T12:33:55.331-07:002017-05-06T12:33:55.331-07:00I didn't know that Robert Ringer was a Russian...I didn't know that Robert Ringer was a Russian immigrant.vonuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453683079174884419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-523483481459678942017-05-06T12:32:44.909-07:002017-05-06T12:32:44.909-07:00Given that all cross border immigration into the U...Given that all cross border immigration into the US occurs in fewer "states" than the original 13 colonies, and it has been a lot time since the federal government has controlled it, in reality, perhaps it is time for the border and coastal states to do as Arizona has been forced to do, secure their borders. If the federales want to secure the border of Arizona, they'll have to get the Border Guard to stay within their 25 mile jurisdiction thereof instead of harassing anglos all along I-8 and I-10 as they have been doing for well over a decade. Since they have been using hispanic Border Patrol agents to do it, and they have been waving hispanics through their checkpoints without even a word, it would be good start to treat them like the domestic enemies that they appear to be. vonuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453683079174884419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-12524006503778166902017-05-06T12:24:25.159-07:002017-05-06T12:24:25.159-07:00What part of American governance of the last sever...What part of American governance of the last several decades would you consider to be not insane?vonuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06453683079174884419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-91382252772894917582017-05-06T11:36:23.966-07:002017-05-06T11:36:23.966-07:00Assuming there are many with that view, how can th...Assuming there are many with that view, how can the state reconcile your interests with respect to that property with conflicting interests of others who feel similarly aggrieved? <br /><br />And if you want the state to take care of this property, won't you have to support it continuing to confiscate income from the population, including you, to pay for its "care operations"?The NAPsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631781625841157567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-45002773835974609902017-05-06T11:12:55.094-07:002017-05-06T11:12:55.094-07:00Ragnar Danneskjöld has the right answer.
Until it...Ragnar Danneskjöld has the right answer.<br /><br />Until it is returned to me, I would prefer that those who now posses it take proper care of it. Just as I would if a thief stole my car.<br /><br />This doesn't mean that I support the thief (or the police state or current immigration control methods) - it just means I want my property returned to me in good condition.bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-39191085559657838222017-05-06T11:02:09.982-07:002017-05-06T11:02:09.982-07:00You shouldn't have to make that choice. Hence...You shouldn't have to make that choice. Hence I'm interested to know what you propose regarding land that is not privately controlled. The NAPsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631781625841157567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-50513797581023200622017-05-06T09:29:39.053-07:002017-05-06T09:29:39.053-07:00Why must I choose between these two options: eithe...Why must I choose between these two options: either open borders or a police state?bionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-26461443584388905702017-05-06T08:48:31.062-07:002017-05-06T08:48:31.062-07:00So if you believe that the state should not be con...So if you believe that the state should not be controlling who can or cannot move around, nor where, and presumably you also agree that private landowners should be their own border control, with respect to land that is not privately controlled how do you differ from an "open borders libertarian"?The NAPsterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16631781625841157567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-21094523614168304142017-05-06T08:31:16.332-07:002017-05-06T08:31:16.332-07:00NoNobionic mosquitohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12002548958078731031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-648884752216444797.post-53437324959058381182017-05-06T08:11:45.634-07:002017-05-06T08:11:45.634-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Josh1476https://www.blogger.com/profile/07881701110722592922noreply@blogger.com