Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ucbjade!mwm
From: mwm@ucbopal.BERKELEY.EDU (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Freedom and property, round 2
Message-ID: <169@ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Mon, 2-Dec-85 00:21:24 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbjade.169
Posted: Mon Dec  2 00:21:24 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 3-Dec-85 04:47:56 EST
References: <1137@mtuxo.UUCP> <280@l5.uucp> <1739@dciem.UUCP>
Sender: network@ucbjade.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: mwm@ucbopal.UUCP (Mike (I'll be mellow when I'm dead) Meyer)
Organization: Missionaria Phonibalonica
Lines: 26

In article <1739@dciem.UUCP> mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) writes:
>Even under the libertarian principles of allowing conversion of land
>to private ownership, there is a prior condition that the land is not
>being used.  Did Running Dog enquire of the bears, birds, deer, and
>other people whether they might have been using the land before he
>started up his plow?  If you answer that the wildlife are not people, and
>therefore need not be consulted, how far are you from denying that
>Amerindians are people, in order to justify Homesteading?

Even without the propertarian principles allowing conversion of land to
private ownership, the question of asking the flora&fauna (you didn't
mention any fauna, Martin!) about re-arranging the ecology of the land is
immaterial. The reasoning behind this is that Humanity, as a race, has the
same rights to modify the ecology as any other race.

For a concrete example, if humanity decided - by democratic vote - to dam a
river to make a reservoir, we'd have as much right to make that attempt as a
collection of beavers.

Of course, if you can get the flora&fauna of a region to sign a mutual,
verifiable :-) freeze on ecology-changing, I'd probably vote for signing
it.  But under those conditions, I'd be willing to grant "person"-hood to
those flora&fauna, so they'd get as much say as any other group of
"person"'s.

	<mike