–“I was working the rather large winter garden this afternoon I have planted with my father. Thinking about the respective Peloponnesian and Delian strategies. It got me thinking about two things. Agricultural productivity / output and the concurrent effervescence of commercial activity, economic growth, and thus civilisational expansion (consider this also in a Rome vs Carthage context too). The second angle was the context of one’s own personal independence and self-sovereignty, in this sense as a landowner, either large or small scale. Be it in terms of food supply, land as a hold of value, and also as an individual / family / community area with which to defend one’s own assets. Whilst Australia and America have different cultures and expressions of “homesteading” there are some similarities too, you might call it a “dying frontier of the self-owned man”. Do you have any pointers or suggestions from a Propertarian standpoint?”— A Friend
[Y]es, you have the correct insight, that I would translate as “If a man is dependent upon the land, he intuits others are also dependent upon the land, and that he cannot defend his land nor can others without collective defense of land, and collective defense by almost everyone. This is the opposite of migratory pastoralists and disaporic traders (Carthage), or diasporic usurers (Jews), or diasporic thieves(gypsies), or diasporic raiders(muslims), diasporic rent seekers(russians, mongols), but not the same as settled(germans, spartans) or diasporic producers (europeans, chinese – and what should have been hindus). That is because we specialize in different strategies and our value of territory, built capital, institutional, and cultural commons, differs by where our revenue comes from and the composition of our ‘armies’ and the strategy that these men use for control of predation (raiding), parasitism (extractive rule, usury, theft), or domestication (productive rule, settlement, common capital production.)