|
|
|
|
|
by aninhumer
3769 days ago
|
|
>It's not a limiting doctrine that says you can only do this or that. Of course it is. It's a limiting doctrine that says "you may use the resources allocated to you within the property system, and no others". This idea that property rights aren't a form of coercion is one of the most tiresome aspects of libertarian rhetoric. Capitalism is a very effective economic system, and that efficiency often affords people more freedom than the alternatives, but it is still fundamentally a system of coercive constraints, as indeed any economic system must be. |
|
I'll agree that there are many ways in which the status quo contains injustice as it relates to claims of ownership, but that's entirely different than calling the system of private property coercive. I also don't think there is one objective standard for what confers just and unjust title (i.e., I think this is an emergent social convention rather than some clearly definable concept), but that again is an entirely different topic.