@aral Of course they did ! What else could they rely on after #Brexit ? :flag_gb: 😂

@aral Property is the ONLY source of rights. Still, corporations are tools of the state. Eliminate the shielding of corporate owners from liability, and most of those problems will go away. Well, eliminate the state, too, but I’ll use property as the guiding principle in my anarchist society. You probably won’t. We’ll see who wins. Likely, whoever has the most guns and is willing to use them, sort of like always.

@billstclair Hey Bill, some of us have these pesky things called human rights that we’re quite fond of in some parts of the world and we’d rather not regress to living by the law of the jungle if we can help it.

@aral I like human rights, too. I just realize that without property, there are no rights. Your body is your property. Anything you build with your property is your property. Anything you trade your property for with other people is your property. Property must be defended, sometimes with lethal force. Hence, you have the right to include weapons in your property, and to use them in defense of your property.

@aral @billstclair

"I’ll use property as the guiding principle in my anarchist society."

That is a terrible Idea. property is not a principle, anarchism is a principle, property is a relationship. and a pretty bad one.

@Midder @aral Property is a human idea. Anarchy has been the nature of the world since God gave free will to Adam. Governments are human ideas meant to improve on God’s design, and all failing miserably.

@billstclair @aral I don't understand the argument that "property is the only source of right". Are you saying that a person without property has no rights whatsoever? I thought rights were things that **everyone had regardless of any external factors**.

IMO, property is a double-edged sword. I believe that people are entitled to own the things they produced and have the right to trade them away. Land is absolutely an exception to that though, as no one can create it.

@stevenroose @aral You always own your body, but you have no right to food, shelter, or transportation. You must peacefully convince others to trade your labor and creations and other morally-acquired property for those.

Real estate is indeed a special kind of property. And the kind that wars are often fought over (land or the minerals in or under it). But I still think it makes more sense, human and ecological sense, for a property owner to be responsible for it, and for his rules to be law on his real estate.

@billstclair @aral Yeah so that's where I think our opinions divert. I do believe that everyone has the *right* to a livelihood. That includes food and a piece of land. I can't understand people argue that if you don't own land (eg your parents rented and died), you just don't have the right to exist because your bear existence is at the mercy of the owner of the ground under your feet. That doesn't make any sense to me.

@stevenroose @aral Ok. Do you have a right to food and housing. Who will give it to you? I won’t. I wrote an essay about that: https://billstclair.com/racism-is-a-right.html

@billstclair @stevenroose Yes, in civilised counties we do. Because it’s in all of best interests that everyone has the basic necessities of life. And because we have the resources to provide it. Especially when a tiny minority doesn’t grab them for themselves.

@aral @stevenroose

Did you just use "civilized" and "countries" in the same sentence? Wow! I didn't know that was possible. If it's a country it is NOT, by definition, civilized. Then again, maybe a country is a united state of mind. Brain-washing works really well, especially in Europe. Ain't no other way to have a united state of mind, unless you have ESP, which I've heard ALL kids have, until society trains it out of them.

I'm more generous than I sound. I carry small bills in my shirt pocket, just so I can give them to people on the street who ask for money (without pulling my wallet out of my pocket). But then, you can't take food from my yard, since none is growing there. I may fix that in the spring, but it will be my first gardening experience in 65 years on the planet.

Come into my house to take food from my refrigerator, however, and you're in for a world of hurt. A very short world.

@billstclair @aral It's not about who will give them to you. But about the fact that you have the right to take them. Food grows on the earth, just as graze animals. Similarly we need a piece of earth to live on. Since we have the right of these things, we can take them. What you see and "entitlement" or expecting others to give these things to you is just a way for society to avoid conflict.

@billstclair @aral Since you have the right to food and we don't want you to take the fruit in my yard, we'll try to convince you to find food elsewhere. Since we prefer not to share our private space with you to live in, we'll try provide you your own space.

Like that, we avoid conflicts. Instead of attacking someone trying to take our food or land, we try provide them with an alternative. All in the believe that when everyone has their basic needs fulfilled, there will be way less conflict.

@stevenroose @aral

Pay the nice tax collector, citizen. You wouldn't want me to arrest you.

@billstclair @aral It's not about that. I'm an anarchist. But I recognize that even anarchism needs to be social if the goal is peace and freedom. Of course we don't need no government that enforces our social behavior with guns. We need a culture where social behavior in ingrained and considered normal.

Capitalism and individualism have brought us far away from that ideal, though. And education is currently our worst enemy, though it is also our only friend if we want freedom to get a chance.

@stevenroose @aral If it ain't voluntary, for everybody, I will not support it. Of course, it's hard to prove that incarnation is voluntary, though I believe it is, and that your soul chose your initial conditions here on Earth. They're nobody else's fault, and also nobody else's responsibility, unless they voluntarily decide to help. Social niceness is nice. It's also impossible to make happen, except by example, and hope that others will participate.

@billstclair @aral Lol you just went from a stubborn grumpy conservative (which is a mood I can somehow understand in today's world) to outright insane 😂 Did you just say you believe people have subconsciously chosen their initial conditions here on Earth??

It's not "nobody else's fault". It's nobody's fault. If anyone's, it's your parents'. I think our conversation has reached a nice ending here :)

@stevenroose @aral Not sub-consciously. Pre-birth. But I can understand that you don’t want to go there. It’s crazy stuff. Keeps me going, though, now that death is standing right in front of me.

@billstclair @aral How about just enjoying your old day by being in nature and being nice to your neighbours? Maybe some voluntary work in a social support initiative 😉

@stevenroose @aral WTF is a “social support initiative”? I DO enjoy nature, every day. And I dance and sing, and often play that funky trombone (white boy). Retirement is good.

@billstclair @aral Any initiative that aims to help people less fortunate than yourself. Can be anything. Open access community gardens. Affordable housing cooperatives. A (once-a-week) free restaurant.
I often hear Americans say "we don't need the government to force us to be social, it needs to be voluntary". Yet the people saying that are usually the least inclined to do voluntary work.

@stevenroose @aral I’d be a lot more inclined to donate to charity, monetarily or voluntarily, if the state didn’t extort half my income in taxes and fees, and spend it on stuff I don’t want.
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Aral’s Mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!