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.
Self-ownership is a nonsensical & meaningless concept.
So the State, who you believe is the rightful owner of our bodies, has the right to regulate what we eat, drink, smoke, or otherwise ingest; has the right to tell us not to get tattoos or piercings; has the right to regulate our hairstyles; has the right to determine our fitness levels; and has the right to regulate our intimate sexual lives...
It's your body part. Once you give it to someone else (the transaction served by the surgeon) you no longer own possession of it but until the transplant is complete it is yours.
I think you are trying to make this more complicated than it really is. I've retread the same water at several points by now.
I don't know what a body part is. Is it a resource? A tool? I thought everything had to be classified as such.
A transplant surgeon offers a service, not a good. Moving a kidney from one person to the other via consent by both participants is not a tool of production but the purpose of the service.
If no one else needs a transplant the surgeon has no rights to force it out of them.
But, you're ignoring the rest of the scenario, and goods depend on services, try running any factory without electricity and electricians, who provide a service.
Your one person with a key skill has renal failure. Their work product is a dependency of all of your productivity. Joe is the 1000th best plumber of your 1000 plumbers and a perfect tissue match. Joe (like Maxwell throwing hammers in the sea) is harming your productivity by refusing to consent to donating a kidney. You said did you not that Maxwell would be dealt with by the union, or mob, or whoever, because he is violating your social rules. Thus by inference Joe is too (I mean he has a spare).
Seriously you hand wave so much I'm struggling to not think it's all on the fly.
Mises, a neo-liberal site that advocates from private authoritarianism has the bias of trying to show anarcho-syndicalism in bad light despite the fact that it actually works and has worked in the past.
In a simulated situation where the characters were assigned values, am I right?
I don't know what a body part is. Is it a resource? A tool? I thought everything had to be classified as such.
It is your own property.
The only things that need to be classified as a resource or a tool are things that can be used for common production (energy sources, building material, etc.) and tools only need to be classified as means of production when they are used to produce common goods that the society needs for a stable existence (not something of the creative matter or something in terms of futuristic proposals).
Read the comments in your own link, most point out the falsities set by the author in explaining anarcho-syndicalism.
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.
