142 replies to this topic

[Hasan]

What are property rights in an anarchic society? And what is property?

[Socrates]

Whatever me and my heavily-armed gang of mercenaries (sorry, I meant "private security agency") says are mine.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Whatever the consensus-based group of wonderful and loving hippies agree is property. Don't hurt anyone, and be a good person. That's the only law in our land. Nobody will disagree because everyone wants peace and love.

Edited by Laudate_Dominum, 30 May 2012 - 07:33 PM.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Whatever me and my heavily-armed gang of mercenaries (sorry, I meant "private security agency") says are mine.

Whoa. Don't take my sunshine away.

[Laudate_Dominum]

What are property rights in an anarchic society? And what is property?

Seriously though, what kind of anarchism are you hoping to interact with? Radically different takes on private property exist as I'm sure you know. The only anarchists I've really seen on this site are anarcho-capitalists, not real anarchists in my book. (TAKE THAT, PETERS!!!) I can pretend to be some kind of social anarchist or anarcho-communist just to shake things up.

Edited by Laudate_Dominum, 30 May 2012 - 09:02 PM.

[Winchester]

Whatever me and my heavily-armed gang of mercenaries (sorry, I meant "private security agency") says are mine.

You mean like these guys?

[Laudate_Dominum]

Future Primitive Revisited just came out. Anarcho-primitivism ftw.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I seriously thought about writing Zerzan a letter after reading his anti-Star Trek essay on the toilet one day.

[Hasan]

Seriously though, what kind of anarchism are you hoping to interact with? Radically different takes on private property exist as I'm sure you know. The only anarchists I've really seen on this site are anarcho-capitalists, not real anarchists in my book. (TAKE THAT, PETERS!!!) I can pretend to be some kind of social anarchist or anarcho-communist just to shake things up.

I actually agree with you. And obviously you are right that my question was sloppy. I should have asked what property was in an anarcho-capitalist system, which I also agree is not really an anarchic system in any meaningful sense of the word. That's not to say that anarcho-capistalism hasn't produced admirable thinkers and raised good questions, but I think that in the final analysis anarcho-capitalism fails conceptually.

[Winchester]

Where is it that you believe anarcho-capitalism falls apart?

[Hasan]

Where is it that you believe anarcho-capitalism falls apart?

I don't understand how a society dominated by private armies and corporations is any better than one dominated by states and public armies. I don't see how the violence that they'd inflict would be any more legitimate than the violence of the state. It seems to take all the worst aspects of the state only removing any sense of accountability.

[Winchester]

I don't understand how a society dominated by private armies and corporations is any better than one dominated by states and public armies. I don't see how the violence that they'd inflict would be any more legitimate than the violence of the state. It seems to take all the worst aspects of the state only removing any sense of accountability.

You're talking about particular function, not the normative position of anarchism.

[Hasan]

You're talking about particular function, not the normative position of anarchism.

That's a very fair point. But I'm still confused about the original question posed. What is property? If I say I own all the water who says that I don't? I don't see where this leads other than you own what you have the capacity to defend bu violence. And I don't see where that leads except to private oligarchies.

[Winchester]

That's a very fair point. But I'm still confused about the original question posed. What is property? If I say I own all the water who says that I don't? I don't see where this leads other than you own what you have the capacity to defend bu violence. And I don't see where that leads except to private oligarchies.

All I can think to do now is to refer you to Hermann-Hoppe for property rights. Most of my reading in that area is devoted to having a quick way to answer such questions without just docu-dumping or lifting someone else's words.

[Winchester]

I suppose a quick definition of property is that over which you have the greatest claim.

Then there's the issue of what may be owned. It has to be scarce and rivalrous, and, of course, unowned by others (meaning here some form of homesteaded use, like someone down river of a river source you claim as your own).

[Laudate_Dominum]

I refer you to Chad Vader.

[KnightofChrist]

What about Space Exploration under Anarchism? No doubt this would fall to corporations, no?

And would or could there exist checks placed corporations? Particularly large ones, I could easily foresee a corporation in the vacuum of non-existant states, becoming in effect states. Something like the fictional "New Detroit" in the Robocop movies just without the razzle dazzle biomechanical cybernetic superhero.

Edited by KnightofChrist, 31 May 2012 - 09:20 PM.

[Winchester]

What about Space Exploration under Anarchism? No doubt this would fall to corporations, no?

And would or could there exist checks placed corporations? Particularly large ones, I could easily foresee a corporation in the vacuum of non-existant states, becoming in effect states. Something like the fictional "New Detroit" in the Robocop movies just without the razzle dazzle biomechanical cybernetic superhero.

All our large corporations grew with help from the government. There's always a danger of people with power turning that power to bad use. The difference between an anarchist and a statist is that the anarchist calls it wrong even if the entity calls itself a government.

[KnightofChrist]

What is a statist?

[Winchester]

One who accepts statism.