WHAT DO WE VIOLATE? –“…I’ve come to think of violence as amoral. The rapist,

WHAT DO WE VIOLATE?

–“…I’ve come to think of violence as amoral. The rapist, and the victim who kills him in self defense… one is immoral, the other moral. Nothing to do with the violence itself, but the violation of rights.”–

One can produce property without rights — all living creatures do.

But one cannot produce a right except via contractual exchange.

So then, do property rights have any meaning outside of the context of a state or polity with whom one ostensibly holds a contract?

What is the point of using this term “rights”? Its meaningless except in the context of some contract or other – a contract libertarians would almost always refuse to enter.

You create your property by your own actions. If people try to appropriate you property against your wishes, then that is not a violation of your magical rights – its just an attack against your property. Period.

In fact, the only reason to define morality any differently is to logically excuse parasitism.

Then the only limit to your property is your own parasitism : free riding on others who produce benefits that you consume but that you fail to pay for.

We need no rights whatsoever. We need only recognize property is the result of our actions. Nothing more.

All platonism is false.

We are supposed to be the smart people. We should try to demonstrate it. Libertarian shouldn’t mean “stupid”. Too often it does.