Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!zehntel!vlsvax1!qantel!lll-crg!lll-lcc!vecpyr!amd!pesnta!pyramid!decwrl!decvax!yale!inmet!nrh
From: nrh@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Re: Property,justice,freedom
Message-ID: <28200290@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Nov-85 18:58:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.28200290
Posted: Thu Nov 14 18:58:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 26-Nov-85 21:30:17 EST
References: <238@gargoyle.UUCP>
Lines: 40
Nf-ID: #R:gargoyle:-23800:inmet:28200290:000:2059
Nf-From: inmet!nrh    Nov 14 18:58:00 1985


Richard,

You make the silly mistake of basing your fable on something that
technically COULD happen in a libertarian society, but wouldn't.

To explain a little more: if people really acted against their own
interests (by imprisoning the people in the interior of the island, and
the interior folks by not taking care to use regularly a path to the shore,
(so as to deny complete ownership acquisition to the "outsiders")) then
there would indeed be unfortunate circumstances.  Why stop there, though?
Why not simply posit that the libertarians (all of them) decided not to 
eat or drink anything?  This would be JUST as consistent with their 
principles (as libertarians, anyhow), and just as likely to happen.

For that matter, let's save time: let's assume that the libertarians
immediately kill themselves (being free to do so).  Does this point up
any danger in libertarianism?  Sure!  That free men may kill themselves,
or act stupidly, if they wish.   Is it likely that the "barbed-wire"
society Richard talks about would evolve?  No -- it depends upon 
people acting contrary to their own interests.

Libertarianism is a philosophy that depends on people pursuing their own
interests.  If you wish to make up fables in which people DON'T pursue
their own interests, fine, but it's silly to post such drivel to the net.
(I am, of course, very interested in any *historical* evidence of 
reasonably free people pursuing someone ELSE's interests -- but remember
it's necessary to show that they weren't (for example) serving an 
ideal that THEY held dear).

As for how one would establish ownership of the Sun, good luck!  You'd
have a hard time showing that other people weren't already using it
productively.

On the other hand, it might not be that hard to get ownership of the
Andromeda Galaxy, provided you could think of some way to USE it all.....
and assuming that it was unused by anyone else.....

I make no claim, here, of course, but I suggest that the Andromeda Galaxy
would be a good place for Richard to store his straw men.....