Do you want the “Property is theft, violent coercion, and nonvoluntary“ shpiel? Because that is how you get the shpiel.
Cause I sure as hell don’t remember agreeing that most of the world was off-limits to me on threat of violence. You wanna go pure non-coercion, you gotta abolish property.(that’s why I don’t go pure non-coercion )
Oh absolutely. Anarcho-Capitalists are so very for the Non-Aggression Principle, but they pull a classic DARVO and claim that when they claim land and you subsequently walk on it, you are aggressing against them. One of the reasons I am not an Anarcho-Capitalist.
My principled approach to property is “check c4ss because someone there has probably thought about the issue deeper and better than I have”, and turns out that this is indeed the case:
The foundation of property shouldn’t hinge on what rocks you’ve poked some point in the past or even what you’ve chosen to extend your cybernetic nervous system into, but what best satiates your desires or aspirations in balance with everyone else’s. This is after all what markets at their best promise: The notion that everyone’s subjective preferences will be satiated more efficiently than would be possible attempting to talk them out in a global consensus meeting.
If markets have a hard time resolving something then they shouldn’t complain if the answer turns out to be to extend the dynamics of markets deeper, to make the very foundations of the economic sphere more organic. And oh, whoops, now no one condemns me for driving off with one of Bill Gates’s cars.
There are two sets of ultimate justifications for property and markets. One is rooted in an entitled tit-for-tat demand for 1-on-1 “fairness.” The other is grounded in a wider ethical lens, seeking only the betterment of all. It should be no surprise if the market structures ultimately promoted by either differ. We’ve already seen that this is the case with “intellectual property.” Libertarians and even state socialists have split hard internally on this issue, some demanding “but I put energy into this, I am due recompense, that’s what fairness is” while others aghast that anyone would even think of seeking to exclude or control what others can have when scarcity is no longer relevant. This poorly papered over chasm between selfish and selfless core perspectives deserves widening. I know what side I’m on.
Not sure if perfect, but at least better than what I’ve seen anyone else offer, as it’s basically able to absorb the good parts of anything while spitting out the bad.
(via shieldfoss)
1 month ago · 133 notes · source: shieldfoss · .permalink
cromulentenough reblogged this from almostcoralchaos
almostcoralchaos reblogged this from ilzolende
kingoftartesoss reblogged this from argumate
kerapace liked this
haunted-french-pancake reblogged this from michaelblume- haunted-french-pancake liked this
not-a-lizard liked this
lisp-case-is-why-it-failed liked this- lisp-case-is-why-it-failed reblogged this from socialjusticemunchkin
zerofarad reblogged this from metagorgon- zerofarad liked this
alexanderrm reblogged this from argumate and added:Imagine if in 500 years memes are seen as old and cultured and people fund official meme institutes with tax dollars...
- alexanderrm liked this
metagorgon reblogged this from socialjusticemunchkin and added:oh my godfacebook likesthat is so aptbills are all “like if you think children should be protected, ignore if you hate...
- metagorgon liked this
accidentalavian liked this
socialjusticemunchkin reblogged this from ilzolende and added:ugh that thingthat exact thingone politician around here (from the Party Formerly Known as the Communist Party) has...
shieldfoss reblogged this from argumate
dhillaoeu reblogged this from argumate
conductivemithril liked this
cantdanse liked this
defectivealtruist liked this
somnilogical liked this
argumate reblogged this from ilzolende and added:Did you mean: mandatory memes
ilzolende reblogged this from shieldfoss and added:I realize this isn’t primarily about mandatory art, but nonetheless mandatory art is the worst.
- ilzolende liked this
guestsemiconductor liked this
nentuaby reblogged this from michaelblume and added:This is… So silly. If the consequentialist position sounds wildly different from the “unprincipled capitalist” position...
downzorz liked this
blashimov liked this
slythernim liked this
michaelblume reblogged this from sinesalvatorem- placid-platypus reblogged this from sinesalvatorem and added:
I go with “Claiming you own property is theft but acceptable for the Greater Good.”
michaelkeenan0 liked this
eaglesnotforks liked this
smart-elec liked this
brin-bellway liked this- anotherpersonhasclaimedthisus said: I mean even if you discovered these universals people would still complain about their illegitimacy. Games these days have “artificial difficulty” after all.
slartibartfastibast reblogged this from neoliberalism-nightly and added:“Again this is sneaking in a concept of morality as an actual physical thing that can be discovered as facts about the...
boozer-pitt liked this
skaidi liked this
cccccppppp liked this
bendini1 liked this
rangi42 liked this
sinesalvatorem reblogged this from shieldfoss and added:Tag yrself I’m a principled consequentialist.
neoliberalism-nightly reblogged this from argumate and added:I mean if that’s your claim then you should just said earlier. I don’t see how it is sneaking stuff in since you have to...
- Show more notes