Quote (thesnipa @ Apr 7 2022 01:55pm)
depends on how you define freedom, and how you think your freedom should or shouldnt interact with another person's freedom.
the freedom lost in going somewhere thats private property is offset by freedom gained from restricting access to your own private property.
private property itself can be enforced by you with force, or the govt with force. i dont think even staunch libertarians would trade a deed of land for an ever existing sense of paranoia and a gun constantly in hand.
Does this not apply to every situation in which property is recognized then? As in a king who owns everything has more freedom which offsets the lack of property of everybody else.
Quote (Santara @ Apr 7 2022 02:13pm)
I believe in this sense, thor's idea of freedom is to be able to go anywhere he wants unless someone is there to stop him.
Going where I want and utilizing anything I want. If we both wash up on an island you don't "own" the coconuts just because you claimed them. Yet that's how all property came into existence. Somebody just claimed it, and then we propagated that into the future.
I'm not saying that having a system of property doesn't give better or worse material outcomes, I'm just saying that we need to acknowledge that, fundamentally, property is a restriction on freedom.
This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Apr 7 2022 01:21pm