|
|
#11
04-02-2007, 11:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
Suppose - to take a hypothetical - that a king notices unrest among his peasants. He has, of course, a mercenary army at his disposal, but for whatever reasons he'd prefer not to use it. He issues a decree, in which he abdicates, disbands his government, and sets up an auction. He then buys up the land the peasants live on. The peasants are now free of taxes. Instead, they must pay rent. He stops calling his men "mercenaries," and starts calling them a "Private Defense Association," instead. What, if anything, has changed? Does the king have any less authority over the peasants as their private landlord, than he did when he was their monarch? [/ QUOTE ] In your example, I would say there is very little difference. But I'm not sure what your example has to do with a stateless society (or with my response, for that matter). The point I was attempting to make is that the 'king' could never justly acquire total domination over such a large area. He has undoubtedly gained such power through theft, aggression, and oppression. So trying to look at what an 'AC society" might look like by basically assuming that he could still keep all his stuff is ridiculous. The money that he used to buy his land back via auction--why wasn't that, too, auctioned off? A far more accurate picture of what ought to happen is that the people who have actually worked the land, who have actually homesteaded and who are the only ones with any real claim to ownership--the peasants, the farmers, the merchants, etc.--it is they who things belong to, not the king. Along these lines, I think that those in our society who have so much stuff as a result of heavy government intervention should not just get to 'carry it over' into an anarchist society. 
|
|
#12
04-03-2007, 12:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
A far more accurate picture of what ought to happen is that the people who have actually worked the land, who have actually homesteaded and who are the only ones with any real claim to ownership--the peasants, the farmers, the merchants, etc.--it is they who things belong to, not the king. [/ QUOTE ] So working the land is a requisite to laying claim? Say you own 10,000 acres and have never stepped foot on the furthest parts. I build a house there and work the land and live off it. Do I have a more just claim to the land than your piece of paper claiming your ownership?
|
|
#14
04-03-2007, 12:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
Alex & Co.: Is this the anarcocapitalist equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting, "I can't heeear you,"? [/ QUOTE ] No, this is the equivalent of saying that you should know better than this by now and it makes me wonder if you do and are just... well, I guess I'm not supposed to say. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] Suffice it to say that both of your posts to me go right along with my theory.
|
|
#15
04-03-2007, 12:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A far more accurate picture of what ought to happen is that the people who have actually worked the land, who have actually homesteaded and who are the only ones with any real claim to ownership--the peasants, the farmers, the merchants, etc.--it is they who things belong to, not the king. [/ QUOTE ] So working the land is a requisite to laying claim? Say you own 10,000 acres and have never stepped foot on the furthest parts. I build a house there and work the land and live off it. Do I have a more just claim to the land than your piece of paper claiming your ownership? [/ QUOTE ] Yes. This is addressed in the AC FAQ. If you are not making productive use of land, you lose your claim to ownership of it.
|
|
#16
04-03-2007, 01:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
A far more accurate picture of what ought to happen is that the people who have actually worked the land, who have actually homesteaded and who are the only ones with any real claim to ownership--the peasants, the farmers, the merchants, etc.--it is they who things belong to, not the king. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah dude. Labor creates value. Capitalists appropriate it from workers. It sounds like you're a socialist (or producerist) and just don't know it.
|
|
#17
04-03-2007, 01:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] A far more accurate picture of what ought to happen is that the people who have actually worked the land, who have actually homesteaded and who are the only ones with any real claim to ownership--the peasants, the farmers, the merchants, etc.--it is they who things belong to, not the king. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah dude. Labor creates value. Capitalists appropriate it from workers. It sounds like you're a socialist (or producerist) and just don't know it. [/ QUOTE ] This is what I was hinting towards.
|
|
#18
04-03-2007, 01:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
So working the land is a requisite to laying claim? [/ QUOTE ] Homesteading is a (and really, the) prerequisite to owning land. [ QUOTE ] Say you own 10,000 acres and have never stepped foot on the furthest parts. I build a house there and work the land and live off it. Do I have a more just claim to the land than your piece of paper claiming your ownership? [/ QUOTE ] Honestly, I'm not sure this situation has a cut and dried answer. If you were the original appropriator of the land, then it is hard to imagine that there would be land that was 'yours' yet you hadn't set foot on it (or near it). But maybe you bought the 10,000 acres from someone. Then there could be a case where you own all 10k acres but you really only needed the west half. So you use that and the rest you don't use. Do you still own the other half? It probably depends on the specifics of the situation. Since its yours, you can do whatever you want with it, including letting it sit there. But it also seems to me that there is a difference between a situation in which someone intentionally wants a part of their land unused (maybe its pretty to look at), and the case where the person just ignores it (essentially abandoning it) and then someone else might claim it. So yeah, sorry this was rambling; the short answer is "it depends".
|
|
#19
04-03-2007, 01:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Anarchocapitalism = economic totalitarianism?
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah dude. Labor creates value. [/ QUOTE ] If by "labor creates value" you mean, individuals determine value subjectively. [ QUOTE ] Capitalists appropriate it from workers. [/ QUOTE ] If by "appropriate" you mean "accept when voluntarily given in exchange for wages."
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
