No.103028
Let's say you left a football on the beach. You put a label on it saying 'I made this, if you use it you owe me ten dollars'. Would I be 'initiating force' by using the football without contributing ten dollars?
Surely I would not be. 'You' are not the product of your labour. You may attempt to control or limit other people's interaction with the product of your labour but you cannot do so using force. In that case you aggress against me.
This is true on its own, but also, consequentially, the ability of people to own the product of their labour leads to the separation of ownership from use, which reduces the freedom of wage-labourers.
____________________________
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103029
This argument seems poorly constructed, but in fairness I’m presently failing to give it a good takedown, so I’m just kvetching.
You only asked one question. I’m not sure how everything you said follows from it. Your one question seems like complaining that “the honor system” is violence, which is weak. A request for ten dollars writ upon a football on the beach has only as much power as you give it. If the label really says, “I made this,” and the ball’s owner just left it there, how are you even going to know where to hand off your doe?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103030
>>103028
>Your one question seems like complaining that “the honor system” is violence, which is weak.
No, I am explaining how using 'private property' without consent does not break the NAP.
Consequently, using violence in retaliation would break the NAP, and capitalism is dependent on that
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103031
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103034
First, your situation is unrealistic. If I made a football and it was stolen it would probably be because someone broke into my house and took it, or snatched it out of my hands. I don't think anyone runs a business by leaving their easily-stolen items out in public with signs on them.
Second. If creating a thing is not sufficient, in your opinion, to establish ownership, then what is? Violence against the body is considered aggression because the individual owns the body. So if you believe that destroying someone's body is aggression, you must have some concept of ownership.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103035
>>103030
>capitalism is dependent on violence
How are you defining capitalism and what's your preferred alternative?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103039
>it's another, "have you heard of the LVT" thread
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103041
>Let's say you left a car on the beach. Would I be 'initiating force' by using the car without your consent?
What do you think?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103042
>>103028
>Let's say you left a football on the beach.
Whether I left a football or a car or a house or a McNuke on the beach is irrelevant. I make the rules for how my things are used.
>Would I be 'initiating force' by using the football without contributing ten dollars?
Yes, you most definitely would be. Would you like it if I took your girlfriend from the beach and used her however I wanted? (Actually… knowing leftycucks, you probably wouldn't mind).
>You may attempt to control or limit other people's interaction with the product of your labour but you cannot do so using force. In that case you aggress against me.
kek, this is some great bait, you guys actually got creative for once, but no, I don't aggress against you by defending what's mine, as for whether I apply an appropriate amount of force, that's to be decided either by private courts or the rules of the private covenant we're in.
The NAP is not the law, the NAP is a foundation for laws to work on, so you can go ahead and create your shitty communes where you live and share everything with other commies and you constantly steal each other's shit, but try stealing something on my beach and you'll get your ass kicked.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103044
the people who invest in transforming the labour in a product are the ones who get the benefits
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103052
Let's say I stake out some unowned land and put a sign up saying "private property — trespassers will be shot". Do you expect me to give a shit about any of your word games about the initiation of force and being the product of my labor?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103063
>>103030
>No, I am explaining how using 'private property' without consent does not break the NAP.
How does that follow from your scenario?
Attempting to dictate terms which simply cannot be followed on property that is not yours is not an example of exercising your private property rights.
First of all, you never established the right to use the beach in that fashion. Second, you never established how someone is supposed to even be capable of complying with (or even fully understanding) your terms. Who are you? How do they pay? What exactly is "use"? The scenario as presented is the most ridiculous strawman of private property rights I've seen all year.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103065
>>103028
My bullet going through your head and my dick through your sister is violating many things, so what? what you gonna do about it soyboy? there ain't no goverment to protect/avenge you in ancap
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103070
>>103065
low tier bait, try harder
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103071
>>103070
>is OP of this thread
>calls any post bait
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103086
If an object that I am quantum entangled to is used to damage property, did I violate the NAP?
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103089
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103093
It's called the homesteading principle and the fact that it took 10 replies for >>103052 to even indirectly reference it is pretty disturbing. Property must be defended for it to be property.
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103094
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.
No.103095
>>103071
I'm not op, faggot
Disclaimer: this post and the subject matter and contents thereof - text, media, or otherwise - do not necessarily reflect the views of the 8kun administration.