Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A caller asked him why the "property" right of which Locke wrote ("life, liberty, and property") was changed in the Declaration of Independence to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
Mark explained that "pursuit of happiness" was understood at the time to encompass more than mere real or personal property.
Okay, but why then is property the weakest right of the three? Why is the right to property so insecure, so tenuous?
Because it's hard to enjoy your property if you're dead. Or in prison.
This is actually an interesting perspective. Most statists can't reason this well.
Air (pollution as a whole) is one area Rothbard struggled with. I struggle with it too.
If you mix your labor with something you can make a claim to it as your property. Locke noted this and Rothbard agreed.
The question is: where does my use of air (and any damaging effects I may induce on it) end and your use of air (with the right to not have aggression committed against you by breathing in bad air) begin?
The best and most logically consistent answer (for an anarcho-capitalist like myself) would be that since you do not produce air, potable water, soil from within your physical body any air,water, or soil you come into contact with is your responsibility to filter as you see fit.
Of course, the best way to do this in a free society (Stateless) would be to form contracts and resolution councils that encouraged actions by yourself and others to put the elements surrounding you into the condition you find most ideal.
Life itself can be construed as an act of aggression on another person because that person must now work harder to find resources for himself due to stronger demand/decreased supply.
So life itself, and byproducts of life itself (expelling carbon dioxide, producing bodily waste) left in unclaimed property or that engages another in their own private property (smells, noises) are not acts of aggression.
During my years as an undergraduate, I was active in Young Americans for Freedom -- the most prominent campus conservative group of the day (1967-71). Like a lot of other chapters, ours was more committed to the secular Objectivist teachings of Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard and Karl Hess than the nationalistic and religious themes of "traditionalist" conservatism.
Our "faculty advisor" was a twenty-six year old graduate student (Physics major) named Douglas Cooper. When not otherwise occupied, Mr. Cooper also found the time to stand for election as a delegate to the 1968 Republican National convention -- successfully.
Doug's specialty was air pollution research; the measurement of the contamination, and the individual responsibility for it, of a presumed "public good".
Looks as though he's done pretty well for himself:
Because it's hard to enjoy your property if you're dead. Or in prison.
It is also hard if government prohibits the transfer of property in increments you can afford. What use is the "right" to buy a half acre if you cannot afford a half acre and if buying .02 acre is not allowed?
During my years as an undergraduate, I was active in Young Americans for Freedom -- the most prominent campus conservative group of the day (1967-71). Like a lot of other chapters, ours was more committed to the secular Objectivist teachings of Ayn Rand, Murray Rothbard and Karl Hess than the nationalistic and religious themes of "traditionalist" conservatism.
Our "faculty advisor" was a twenty-six year old graduate student (Physics major) named Douglas Cooper. When not otherwise occupied, Mr. Cooper also found the time to stand for election as a delegate to the 1968 Republican National convention -- successfully.
Doug's specialty was air pollution research; the measurement of the contamination, and the individual responsibility for it, of a presumed "public good".
Looks as though he's done pretty well for himself:
Air is a common good. I'd make a substantial bet you weren't around a city in the early 70s, because the air can be bad & can cause a host of health problems. Thus we regulate it to limit the emission of harmful pollutants.
As I said: oceans are in essence state property near the shore (a particular form of collective good), but on the high seas they are open access. Meaning: they are not private property. They are a collective property under our legal regime.
Water is a common good. From an editorial a few days ago, on the 4th of July:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
