Still looking for answers from "anarcho-capitalists"

jogger08152 · #1 07-06-2007, 10:01 PM

Suppose a tribe of American Indians travels/lives in a relatively broad area, living off the land as hunter/gatherers. In no way do they improve the land; rather, they leave it unchanged and take what they need to live.

Is it morally okay for people to move in and homestead upon this unimproved, but "claimed", land?

Misfire · #2 07-06-2007, 10:02 PM

How is it claimed?

BCPVP · #3 07-06-2007, 10:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose a tribe of American Indians travels/lives in a relatively broad area, living off the land as hunter/gatherers. In no way do they improve the land; rather, they leave it unchanged and take what they need to live.

Is it morally okay for people to move in and homestead upon this unimproved, but "claimed", land?

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty sure Nietzrenzor answered this the first time you asked it.

jogger08152 · #4 07-06-2007, 10:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Suppose a tribe of American Indians travels/lives in a relatively broad area, living off the land as hunter/gatherers. In no way do they improve the land; rather, they leave it unchanged and take what they need to live.

Is it morally okay for people to move in and homestead upon this unimproved, but "claimed", land?

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty sure Nietzrenzor answered this the first time you asked it.

[/ QUOTE ]
He did. Does he speak for you on this topic?

jogger08152 · #5 07-06-2007, 10:09 PM

[ QUOTE ]
How is it claimed?

[/ QUOTE ]
Perhaps it isn't. Clearly people are living upon it and using it; do you consider this adequate grounds for a claim upon the land? If not, what would nomads need to do in order to validate their claim, such that the land upon which they wished to hunt/gather could not be (legitimately) taken from them by others without their consent?

BCPVP · #6 07-06-2007, 10:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Suppose a tribe of American Indians travels/lives in a relatively broad area, living off the land as hunter/gatherers. In no way do they improve the land; rather, they leave it unchanged and take what they need to live.

Is it morally okay for people to move in and homestead upon this unimproved, but "claimed", land?

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty sure Nietzrenzor answered this the first time you asked it.

[/ QUOTE ]
He did. Does he speak for you on this topic?

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with his position. I think most ACists do as well.

bkholdem · #7 07-06-2007, 10:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Suppose a tribe of prehistoric neandertals travels/lives in a relatively broad area, living off the land as hunter/gatherers. In no way do they improve the land; rather, they leave it unchanged and take what they need to live.

Is it morally okay for other neandertals to move in and homestead upon this unimproved, but "claimed", land?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it?

Suppose a tribe of monkeys inhabits an area, is it OK for a different tribe to move in and homestead?

Suppose a tribe of animals lives in an area not inhabited by humans, is it ok for a group of indians to move in and start killing the animals to use for their own selfish ends?

And if you want to get really cute we can play a version of your 'at what exact point does it become permissible to defend myself game' in this thread with respect to the variying moral quesitons that arise in your belief system.

IsaacW · #8 07-06-2007, 11:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Pretty sure Nietzrenzor answered this the first time you asked it.

[/ QUOTE ]
He did. Does he speak for you on this topic?

[/ QUOTE ]
nietzrenzor's response was a reasonable one. If I hunt and gather on land I am not improving it, so it does not become my property. If I create trails in the process of doing this, I am improving the land that the trails are on and a claim could be made that the trails are my property.

Borodog · #9 07-07-2007, 12:48 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Still looking for answers from "anarcho-capitalists"

[/ QUOTE ]

No, you aren't.

From the very first douchebaggy pm you sent me to your perjorative rechristening of a philosophy you willingly refuse to even try to comprehend, you've done nothing but continually demonstrate your lack of interest in the answers people have given you. You are only interested in winning an argument. You are only interested in your preconceived notions. You are only interested in your apologetics for the status quo.

hmkpoker · #10 07-07-2007, 03:29 AM

This anarcho-capitalist doesn't believe in morality of any kind, so the question is pretty moot for me.