Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site topaz.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbdkc1!desoto!packard!topaz!josh
From: josh@topaz.ARPA (J Storrs Hall)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Use, Property, and Fable:Libertaria
Message-ID: <418@topaz.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 28-Jan-85 21:48:24 EST
Article-I.D.: topaz.418
Posted: Mon Jan 28 21:48:24 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Jan-85 06:23:52 EST
References: <1881@inmet.UUCP> <416@klipper.UUCP> <665@ucbtopaz.CC.Berkeley.ARPA> <449@whuxl.UUCP>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 61

> > 
> > To provide yet another fable, suppose I find some land that is obviously
> > unused (no structures, and no roads leading to the area) and homestead it.
...
> 
> This is certainly a fable! Except, I believe, for parts of Alaska which
> are still available for homesteading, where is one to find land in this
> country that is not claimed by somebody? 

a) FYI, the Homestead Act is no longer on the books (it was dumped during
the Carter administration).  Legally, there is absolutely no land that
you may homestead in the US.

**but**

b) more than 40% of the land area of the US is not privately owned.
It is owned by the government directly.  

> Worse yet, in this industrial
> society, where is one to find factories or machinery unclaimed by 
> anybody? 

What?!?!? Factories and machinery can't be homesteaded!  Anything
that is so obviously the product of someone's labor belongs to him
forever (unless, of course, he elects to trade it).

> Let me tell you a little story.  There was once a small plot of land
> that was unused on a certain University.  ... "People's Park" ...
> Eventually our dear friend, the then Governor of California, Ronald Reagan
> (such a *nice* man!!)sent in helicopters and tear gas ...

Maybe you hadn't noticed, but Reagan isn't a libertarian (he isn't
even a Libertarian...).

> Let's not talk about pleasant fables we can think up in our heads.

Right. All Utopians off the net.  Free speech has been canceled.
Ignorance is strength. War is peace. College is educational.

>   How do
> Libertarians propose to bring about such a restructuring of traditional
> notions of property without immense struggle?

I always thought the libertarian notion of property was quite close
to the "traditional" one.  

> How do you determine what constitutes "use" of property that thereby
> legitimates or negates the right to property?  

Good question, for which there is no general answer.  In fact I disagree
with (the implications of) the statements some libertarians have made
here about it.  Anyone care to discuss it seriously on net.politics.theory?

> I am glad to see Libertarians beginning to shed an absolute defense of
> property.  I hope discussion continues in this vein.
>        tim sevener   whuxl!orb

Sorry, I go the other way, indeed I would describe myself as a 
"propertarian" rather than libertarian..

--JoSH