Form: Quote Commentary

–“Human cooperation is the result of three factors: the differences among men and/or the geographical distribution of nature-given factors of production; the higher productivity achieved under the division of labor based on the mutual recognition of private property (the exclusive control of every man over his own body and his physical appropriations and possessions) as compared to either self-sufficient isolation or aggression, plunder and domination; and the human ability to recognize this latter fact. “– Hoppe – “NATURAL ORDER, THE STATE, AND THE IMMIGRATION PROBLEM”

[I]’m going to correct Hans a bit here by saying that human cooperation is the result of these properties:

• 1) the differences in abilities among men.
  2) the geographical distribution of nature-given factors of production.
  3) the local structure of production: the division of knowledge and labor.
  4) the local structure of the family and inheritance rights.
  5) the distribution of property rights between the individual, family, group and the commons.
  6) the degree of suppression of, and intolerance for, free riding both in and out of family.
  7) calculative, cooperative technology available for economic signaling and coordination. (objective truth, numbers, money, prices, interest, writing, contract, and accounting).
  8) The use of formal institutions to perpetuate these constraints.
  9) The competition from groups with alternate structures of production, family, inheritance, property rights, free riding, cooperative technologies, and formal institutions.
  10) The recognition of these facts. (I question whether this last one is true.)

CONVERTING HOPPE FROM CONTINENTAL TO EMPIRICAL [T]he more work I do the more I come to see my work as converting hoppe’s Continental arguments into Anglo Empirical arguments. Just like Hoppe converted Rothbard’s Cosmopolitan arguments into more rigorous continental language. [callout]The vast majority of people do not desire liberty – they desire only consumption. They have the numbers. They always will.[/callout] I think a few people have caught on to what I mean when I say that Hoppe got most everything right. He just didn’t get to the CAUSE of liberty. He was able to deduce all the applications of property rights, but not it’s cause. I got to its cause. The organized use of violence to suppress free riding in all its forms, and the grant of property rights reciprocally to those who thusly applied their violence. Understanding the cause changes our tactic in obtaining and maintaining liberty. You don’t appeal for it. You demand it. If your demands aren’t met you take it. The vast majority of people do not desire liberty – they desire only consumption. They have the numbers. They always will. Property rights are a moral conspiracy so to speak.

–“Human cooperation is the result of three factors: the differences among men and/or the geographical distribution of nature-given factors of production; the higher productivity achieved under the division of labor based on the mutual recognition of private property (the exclusive control of every man over his own body and his physical appropriations and possessions) as compared to either self-sufficient isolation or aggression, plunder and domination; and the human ability to recognize this latter fact. “– Hoppe – “NATURAL ORDER, THE STATE, AND THE IMMIGRATION PROBLEM”

[I]’m going to correct Hans a bit here by saying that human cooperation is the result of these properties:

• 1) the differences in abilities among men.
  2) the geographical distribution of nature-given factors of production.
  3) the local structure of production: the division of knowledge and labor.
  4) the local structure of the family and inheritance rights.
  5) the distribution of property rights between the individual, family, group and the commons.
  6) the degree of suppression of, and intolerance for, free riding both in and out of family.
  7) calculative, cooperative technology available for economic signaling and coordination. (objective truth, numbers, money, prices, interest, writing, contract, and accounting).
  8) The use of formal institutions to perpetuate these constraints.
  9) The competition from groups with alternate structures of production, family, inheritance, property rights, free riding, cooperative technologies, and formal institutions.
  10) The recognition of these facts. (I question whether this last one is true.)

CONVERTING HOPPE FROM CONTINENTAL TO EMPIRICAL [T]he more work I do the more I come to see my work as converting hoppe’s Continental arguments into Anglo Empirical arguments. Just like Hoppe converted Rothbard’s Cosmopolitan arguments into more rigorous continental language. [callout]The vast majority of people do not desire liberty – they desire only consumption. They have the numbers. They always will.[/callout] I think a few people have caught on to what I mean when I say that Hoppe got most everything right. He just didn’t get to the CAUSE of liberty. He was able to deduce all the applications of property rights, but not it’s cause. I got to its cause. The organized use of violence to suppress free riding in all its forms, and the grant of property rights reciprocally to those who thusly applied their violence. Understanding the cause changes our tactic in obtaining and maintaining liberty. You don’t appeal for it. You demand it. If your demands aren’t met you take it. The vast majority of people do not desire liberty – they desire only consumption. They have the numbers. They always will. Property rights are a moral conspiracy so to speak.