Great work. As usual. 😉 Suggestion, 1, I would say all behavior has three state

Great work. As usual. 😉

Suggestion, 1, I would say all behavior has three states, and that you might consider Acquisition, Consumption, Preservation, and Defense. Or Acquisition, use, and defense.

Suggestion: 1. All acquisition use and defense is reducible to homesteading (demonstrating an interest by investing in that which is not yet invested in), transformation, and exchange.

Nit: 1. “property relations” might be stated as ‘transfers of a demonstrated interest”. I think property might be too ambiguous at term for our purposes.

Nit: 2. “is sufficiently prosecuted” should be either “can be sufficiently prosecuted…” or “is sufficiently prosedutable..”

Suggestion: In 2. you separate the ‘whereas’ from the ‘therefore’ with a paragraph break. I think this is the right format and you might consider tweaking all of them to fit that format for the purpose of clarity. This will help people remember the ‘therefore’ statements.

Suggestion: in 4 I would reverse the examples so that the more legitimate is first, and the less so consumptive is second.
Hmmm…. I might even separate them as I do in the constitutional work as Natural Rights vs Constructed or Legislative Rights. Though now that I think about it I think I like your capitalizing vs consuming approach as it is. 😉

Question: do you think you have sufficiently conveyed that rights are produce as a common by reciprocal insurance, or are you leaving that up to the reader to deduce?

Reply addressees: @ContraFabianist