Damus
BlueDuckBTC · 4w
In order to have property rights, there needs to be enforcement of those property rights. Who enforces those property rights and how? You reject my premise on a time period of capitalism being “true...
leadbyexample profile picture
Right, I don't have one, or I would have loved to throw that in your face 😜
Once again, this would have been the same exact situation if you were asking this about slavery, 200 years ago, so what?

Yours is a contradiction, you are saying that, in order to protect your own property rights, you need to accept a centralized violent arbitrary institution with the unchallenged power to violate your property rights.

I don't know what the free market will come up with, Stefan Molynex wrote a book about a possible future scenario, which is called "Practical Anarchy", but it's like asking anti-slavery activists in the 800s how would cotton be processed 200 years in the future.

Also you are starting from a utilitarian premise, not a moral one.
The moral premise is "violation of property rights is wrong".

Any utilitarian approach will end with a varying degree of dictatorship, since ordering people around with the threat of violence is pretty much effective, once you indoctrinate children to the legitimacy of the existing authority through public schooling.
1
BlueDuckBTC · 3w
Incorrect, mine is not a contradiction. I believe you need an agreed upon set of rules in order to have property rights. This would include rules, consequences for infractions, and a way to make sure people can’t arbitrarily use this system to falsely accuse someone of property right violations. ...