**WHAT** PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE SUFFICIENT FOR A PEACEFUL CIVILIZATION? —The foun

**WHAT** PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE SUFFICIENT FOR A PEACEFUL CIVILIZATION?

—The foundation of a peaceful and prosperous civilization is “property rights are human rights and human rights are property rights.”— Bruce Koerber, Auburn University

Bruce,

While TRUE, in the sense that our laws and courts must resolve differences by property rights for us to live in a state of LEGAL LIBERTY, it is not true that property rights are the foundation of a peaceful and prosperous civilization, by any means, unless one enumerates all categories and cases of property, and provides for a means of their evolutionary expansion.

Property defined as that which is Intersubjectively Verifiable (as I have written about profusely) is absolutely, positively, insufficient for the formation of a peaceful polity, and even less so for a civilization, because it offers an insufficient suppression of unethical and immoral actions to prevent conflict, and therefore for demand for an authoritarian state.

Property must extended to the ethical and moral, which rothbardian ethics of the ghetto’s low trust society do not.

Primitive societies did not lack internal property rights any more than today’s primitive families lack internal property rights. The problem is extending the treatment we grant to others within the family across family, tribal, cultural, and racial bounds.

The libertarian fallacy is the presumption of the benevolence of human nature across familial, tribal, cultural, commercial bounds, which is contrary to all evidence from all civilizations, and all cultures at all points in time.

No people, lacking an authoritarian martial government can defend itself from parasitic conquest without

Rothbard took his ethics from the Medieval ghetto and like a good Cosmopolitan tried to justify the ethics of the ghetto just as germans the ethics of the land, and the english the ethics of the island. But while german ethics of the land, require nothing external to the polity but neighbors with different norms, the english ethics of the island require a sea to protect them, and the jewish ethic of the ghetto requires an authoritarian overlord to create a fictitious environment in which violence is not permitted but unethical and immoral behavior is tolerated as long as it does not lead to violence.

Humans require manners, ethics, morals, AND property rights to cooperate. Otherwise conflict or authoritarianism is preferable to the high transaction costs of trying to cooperate.

The germans were right albeit in the pseudoscientific authoritarian and rational language of Kant, and the anglos were right in their empirical and psychological language, yes, but wrong in that they assumed all men wished to, or were capable of, joining the aristocracy and incurring its responsibility.

But rothbard was the most wrong of all – in not only his language, but in his methods, logic and assumptions of man. Meaning that rothbard joins Spinoza, Marx, Freud, Cantor and even to some degree Popper, as manufacturer of elaborate verbal pseudosciences – the thinkers that doomed the 20th century to an age of pseudosciences, and destroyed the aristocratic libertarian ethos of western civilization.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev,Ukraine