Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site spp2.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwspp!spp2!jhull
From: jhull@spp2.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The FORCE of Property
Message-ID: <364@spp2.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Jan-85 16:46:12 EST
Article-I.D.: spp2.364
Posted: Tue Jan 15 16:46:12 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Jan-85 01:21:03 EST
References: <4521@cbscc.UUCP> <423@whuxl.UUCP>
Reply-To: jhull@spp2.UUCP (Jeff Hull)
Organization: TRW, Redondo Beach  CA
Lines: 27
Summary: 

In article <423@whuxl.UUCP> orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) writes:
>Libertarians on the net have been constantly reiterating a concern
>with the "force" of government.  ...
>...  Property can only be maintained by force.  ...  Force
>is justified (for Libertarians) in the defense of private property.
>I would argue that force is to some extent *necessary* for the
>existence of private property.
> 
>Once again we return to the example of the American Indians who had
>no concept of land ownership.  ...
>tim sevener    whuxl!orb

I think Tim has made an important point here, one that I think will
generate a lot of discussion.  As we go forward, I would like to
suggest that we distinguish between privately-owned real property and
privately-owned created property.  I am not sure how to justify the
former but, clearly, I have some rights to the latter.  After all, it
was my life, my time, my effort, that created it.  If I worked for it,
it belongs to me!  (In other words, I do NOT support wealth
redistribution schemes.)

-- 
					Blessed Be,

 					Jeff Hull
 {ihnp4}trwrb!trwspp!spp2!jhull		13817 Yukon Ave.
					Hawthorne, CA 90250