home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.environment
- Path: sparky!uunet!world!rjk
- From: rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker)
- Subject: Re: Property is *never* "unalienable"
- Message-ID: <C18IuC.8Lr@world.std.com>
- Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
- References: <88290203@hpindda.cup.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 02:56:36 GMT
- Lines: 103
-
- In a posting to talk.environment Alan McGovern writes:
-
- AM:Property rights are not, never have been, and never will be "unalienable".
- AM:No society that ever has or ever will exist will completely detach property
- AM:rights -- or *any* rights -- from all consequences.
- ..... ommisions.....
-
- Nor will libertarians. The ownership of property or the right to own property
- does not confer a right to initiate force.
-
- AM:It never will be either, if it is founded (as it seems to be) on the principle
- AM:that principle ought to override reality come hell or high water. That would
- AM:be suicidal, and wise -- or even middling muddle-through -- societies are
- AM:not suicidal.
-
- Au contraire. The right to own property is founded in reality. Property is
- necessary to maintain life. How could anyone live if they or someone who
- provided for them did not have the implements to secure food, clothing,
- shelter, safety etc.. The Constitutional right to persue hapiness is
- precisely the right to own property. In fact the was Jefferson's original
- phrasing in his list of inalienable rights in an early draft of the Declar-
- ation of Independence.
-
-
- AM:When you strip away the moral absolutism from the basis of Libertarianism,
- AM:and allow enough compromise to make it even slightly viable, what you get
- AM:is Reaganism. We tried that, it created a disaster, and now we are paying
- AM:for it. To the extent that Libertarianism were "really" tried, it would
- AM:create an even bigger disaster.
-
- Nonsense. Whatever Reagan was doing, it was not minimal government
- libertarianism. Reagan, regardless of his rhetoric, was a Big Govt. inter-
- ventionist.
- [ommissions]
-
- * * * * * *
-
- AM:Yoder also spreads the usual right wing extremist, anti-democracy lie that
- AM:market values are the totality of all values, and that there are no societal
- AM:political or legal values which may be adopted by due process:
-
- >Markets for
- >resources do a pretty good job of evaluating the real values people place on
- >the things and processes in question and motivate other choices accordingly.
- >Now, if you think that sum of economic values ought not to be followed, you
- >can hardly claim to be in any worthwhile sense in favor of "democracy"...what
- >you favor is a system where your clique rules over everyone else.
-
- Both of you have a restricted notion of market. A market is an arrangement
- for the *voluntary* exchange of values. The values can be material, i.e.
- tangible objects offered for sale. They can be services. They can also be
- spiritual. For example, the informed praise of an audience is part of the
- "payment" that an artist receives for his/her work.
-
- AM:What I think is that anyone who denies the right of representative government
- AM:to determine societal values and actions that go beyond the "sum of (market)
- AM:economic values" is denying the legitimate government of the United States
- AM:of America, and is an enemy of the Constitution. Your own freedom to speak
- AM:this infamy is a *nonmarket* political value which is protected by the very
- AM:Constitution and political process which you seek to undermine with your
- AM:vicious doctrine that only markets and private wealth should determine all
- AM:that is valuable, and should govern every aspect of our lives.
-
- AM:*Citizens* of a *democracy* will not be subjugated by such a pernicious
- AM:lie -- such a latter-day Circe's spell -- which attempts to reduce us
- AM:to nothing more than *appetites* at a *supermarket*. *Citizens* recognize
- AM:that beyond market values and "economic sums" there are values of public
- AM:interest, social justice, and moral responsibility -- and that among these
- AM:is the responsibility not to bequeath future generations a biosphere that
- AM:is irreversibly worse for our having existed.
-
- In the market place of ideas, freedom of speech is the freedom to trade.
- I also point out our appetite for clean air, clean water, and a good view
- of the sunset is a much an object of trade as anything else. I know of
- people who have spent good money to get a good view of the ocean.
-
- AM:You, sir, are a true enemy of Democracy and of your Country. Fortunately,
- AM:you and your faction are quite powerless to do really significant harm for
- AM:the foreseeable future, though you will undoubtedly make what mischief you
- AM:can at every opportunity.
-
- Let me get this right. Someone who advocates freedom to trade and produce in
- the full sense is an enemy of the Republic. The same Republic founded on the
- premise that individuals own their bodies (yes I am aware of the contradict-
- ion of Slavery. It took a bloody war to resolve that.) and to choose how and
- where they will spend their time. I think this a clearly untrue. A real
- honest to goodness free-marketeer will not advocate a principle which under
- cuts his own freedom to trade and produce. Free markets are the most demo-
- cratic institution on earth. We vote with our money, we vote with our choices,
- we vote with our feet. And it can be done every day, not just on special
- Tuesday-s in November.
-
-
- ------------
- Alan McGowen
-
- Broaden your view Alan. Man does not live by bread alone.
-
- Conan the Libertarian
-
- --
- "If you can't love the Constitution, then at least hate the Government"
-
-