orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (01/22/85)
> >response from nrh to richard carnes: > >[Let me throw in another libertarian fable here, although it is not directly > >relevant: The Mayflower lands, and most of the Pilgrims remain on board to > >settle on a political constitution. One Pilgrim, however, sneaks ashore and > >claims Massachusetts. According to libertarian principles, the other > >Pilgrims will have to rent or buy land from the one who owns Massachusetts, > >or else move on to New Hampshire. Anything wrong with this scenario, > >libertarians?] > > Sure! You only own land so long as you have some direct claim to it > (for example, you're using it). I cannot plausibly claim to use all > of Massachusetts, so I can't claim it all and charge people rent. > Oh! Well, I am glad to hear that Libertarianism *only* supports property rights when the property can be actually used by the owner. In that case then the workers who actually *use* the factories owned by the Rockefellers can assert their property rights to ownership by use. After all there is no way all the Rockefellers in the world could use their numerous factories and other capital goods to produce anything. There just aren't enough of them! I apologize for any past criticisms of Libertarianism and its defense of private property. I now realize that in fact Libertarianism is quite consistent with socialist appropriation of the means of production! Viva Libertarianism!! tim sevener whuxl!orb