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