Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC830713); site klipper.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep
From: biep@klipper.UUCP (J. A. "Biep" Durieux)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: A Question for Libertarians
Message-ID: <358@klipper.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Nov-84 15:02:42 EST
Article-I.D.: klipper.358
Posted: Mon Nov 12 15:02:42 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Nov-84 06:06:02 EST
References: <1798@inmet.UUCP>
Reply-To: biep@klipper.UUCP (Dik Boter &VDSB)
Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam
Lines: 32
Summary: 

[]
	Just one stupid question out of hundreds of possible ones:

	Suppose I own some piece of land, and while I'm on it my
	neighbour buys all the surrounding land and tells me that
	I am not allowed to pass over it. He certainly isn't initi-
	ating force, nor does he impose an active duty upon me. Ne-
	vertheless he can starve me to death in this way. Is that
	allowed? If not, who is there to protect me? (Are my protec-
	tors allowed to pass over my neighbour's land?).

	If you consider the situation too academic, suppose someone
	shields off some local recource (water?) in this way, while
	all others are too far away. There is no river, just a well.

	Or my neighbour, who owns the only possible road through the
	mountain land, decides to rise the toll to an amount I can't
	afford, so I'm locked in my little valley.

	I think there must be law to prevent this sort of scenarios
	from occurring; either a legal law or a moral law (Christian
	love?), which is, either by force or by conviction, binding.


-- 

							  Biep.
	{seismo|decvax|philabs}!mcvax!vu44!botter!klipper!biep

I utterly disagree with everything you are saying, but I am
prepared to fight myself to death for your right to say it.
							--Voltaire