frickin' neoHippie. LOL You asked the question backwards! It should be: Does your body own all it's bloodcells? If it doesn't, you are done. Same with the property you attained. Without it you are like a body without blood... always looking for a transfusion from someone else. Many will kill for that vampire need.
and for this:
These approaches to land, and the idea of owning it, are all based on the concept that the land was unused before given human came upon it.<<<
whence did that floating non-sequitor originate? Who gives a rat's pooper whether or not the land was owned previously? Where is the relevance for this? I have heard men make good case for Squatting Rights.
Once again, back to 1967 with Kenny and his Kitchen. LOL
It never ceases to amaze me how Anarchos will (rightfully) back/express NAP via some sort of Objective Universal Moral Maxim, yet every other moral and philosophical premise is purely subjective depending on the tribal whim of the day. What irony!
and you write as if this rock we named "Earth" is some organism with a conscience. Is that the case in your world view?
the earth is a rock. Ownership doesn't have relevance to a rock... except that it can be owned, or parted out. LOL Welcome to Libertavian masturDebate society. You are a hoot. Rights and Ownership are concerns of conscious beings who have to make moral choices.
As long as we are at it, when does the debate about the shape of this rock begin? Is that on the schedule at this convention?
Hey... you know what's cool? Somehow you neoHippies can attract the ladies. The rest of Libertavia usually follows this meme:
What is your secret ingredient to overcome it? Drugs? KamaSutra? Inform those boys, please. Imagine what would happen at Anarchopulco and AnarchoForko if the ratio of attendees would even out?
So what are your particular views on ownership? I'm missing your opinion as you proceed to bash Kenny's.
The statement that "earth is rock" seems to be stemming from some form of nihilism, but I can't be sure. It surely tastes like a statement made from a place that reeks of rotten ignorance on having an overview of the bigger picture and the way life on this planet actually functions (spirituality aside).
You are obviously an intelligent human. I pray you guide that active brain in a way that engages people from a more loving space instead of insinuating your superiority and using insults to feel justified in your perspective.
multiTask, alex. LOL
rotten ignorance? Really? Is that the best you got? As for IQ... just over 100. My brothers got all the brains in the family. I make it up with persistence.
And I'm from NY... and then Vegas. WE LIVE TO THROW BARBS. That's how we show love. If we don't love'ya, we just ignore your sorry asses! Stop your pissAnt whining. sheeesh. Kenny can take the heat in his Kitchen. He doesn't need you to put on an apron for him to hide behind. He's the one who comes out of the kitchen and into the dining room or back alley, looking for some action. He's the dang instigator. Which is wonderful... but you can't expect us all to just genuflect in awe when he does!!
Now, which question do you want to tackle?
In the meanwhile: Please connect the dots for me between "earth is a rock" and "nihilism". I don't even come close to seeing that pic. I used the colloquial phrase to distinguish it from some sort of animal or spiritual being.... for which, I challenged KK to provide his basis. That's fair, isn't it?
Well in that case. Thanks for the love.
Maybe my east coast upbringing has grown soft in the 12 years I've lived in Colorado. And maybe I was responding in kind. So I can appreciate your style somewhat more now that I know that's what it is and am coming to understand you. Still a little abrasive, but maybe Kenny's pots need some scrubbin' from time to time, as we all do.
I'm not here to defend Kenny though, I know he's solid. I just had some thoughts to share.
I also don't believe IQ is an accurate measure of intelligence, but that's just my opinion.
As for earth is a rock = nihilism...I made the connection because the colloquialism seems to deny the existence of the incredible complexities and expressions of existence it took to allow life on earth to exist, propagate and perpetuate. If I compare earth to a rock or earth to an animal (aka living creature) I find it has far more in common with the animal. I do think we need to use caution in giving this earth-organism anthropomorphic qualities because most likely whatever type of consciousness it might have is probably beyond our current comprehension, and thus appears to travel into the magickal mystic realms. (which, by the way I believe is one of the best sources of inspiration in scientific studies). Is it fair for you to use that to distinguish as a basis? Sure. All opinions are fair to have. Is it fair that I disagree?
I only asked one question, which was, "what are your particular views on ownership?", because I've still only seen you put down others... so I'm very curious.
Thanks for responding. I love you too!
What????????? Whence does this originate? Please substantiate. That would be a game changer, in a sense... Sounds like Buddha chiming in. And if that is the case, we can respectfully agree to disagree and just "enjoy each others' company" in a NAPster Agora3. LOL
Now, even if earth is "an animal", what moral imperative stops me from owning it (or a part of it) and putting it to good use?
I actually don't claim to have any firm moral righteousness on knowing who should own what.
As far as substantiating my point... The earth breathes, it eats, it's made up of many particles that work together to allow it to support life.... I could go on. It's still from an anthropomorphized perspective, but I'd like to hear about how it's different from an animal (aka living creature), cuz I don't see it. Don't need any Buddha or messiah to tell me what I can obviously deduce.
I love the ability to enjoy someone I disagree with, but I like even more when we both walk away with something to consider.
So I will enjoy chewing on your response. Since I don't personally in this moment have a firm stance on "ownership" I will roll around with your view and see if anything surfaces. Thank you for sharing.
[email protected] Anyone. Anytime. Let's pursue this strain.......
Louis Charles "Chuck" Geshlider
Prime Minister, Deplorable Nation
I own myself. I choose who to "do business with". From that point, I put my time and effort into "enterprising" activities, either alone or with a coordinated effort of a team... some of which bear fruit... or profits, where I have more "stuff" than I did when I began such labor. I own the resulting residuals. Why are we making this so difficult? It should be a concept a 10 year old should be able to handle with ease.
As for Rothbard and Hoppe: They are economists, attempting to play philosopher gods. Since when do they have some magical power to mandate Truth? Those positions you bring forth are presented as if they are axiomatic. What makes them self-evident? Not a thing. I respect their opinions.... to a point.
A friend and I used to sit down with Hoppe when he taught at UNLV back in '89-'90 at a pub across the street. Each week, he and a few of his students would have a few beers and shoot the poop like this. Dude... HE IS A BRICK. Perhaps he could get away with some of his sophistry with the children in his class, but dealing with a 33 year old man who was pretty well read in Randian Objectivism, plus had real world experience from owning his own business since 24 years old... coming from the greater NYC area, it wasn't so easy for him. Typical to form, he wilted when forced into a position to provide at least SOME empirical evidence to back his CLAIMS.
funny thing how those two had no moral compunction against taking salary from THE STATE OF NEVADA!!! My friend and I used to bust Rothbard's balls over this once in a while when we'd bump into him in Kinkos across from UNLV. No sacred cows...... No false demigods, bud.