My solution to the Libertarian dilemma

[noddy]

re: private property and public property - their needs to be both, and the exact blend would depend heavily on conditions on the ground in regards population density.

it would be a nightmare to have every road a toll road, every space private - it would be equally a nightmare not to be able to build a space to your own standards and preferences, conforming to lowest common denominator views and giving up all sense of individuality.

by and large australia has a great mix of private spaces and public ones, so this isnt really an issue for me - the status quo is great.

[skyhook77sfg]

QUITE RIGHT TINKER....

whether native americans "discovered" by the way off course Japan bound Colombo....

or noddy's dreamtime aboriginal predecessors way down under...

or recently discovered rain forest tribes in pristine natural state....


they know no natural law of property rights...

not to real property in the capitalist sense.

they dont even have the concept of private much less property .

not naturally.

it is like stinky cheese an acquired taste.

[noddy]

yeh, but in comparison they know the tribe and the bigman in the tribe is like a totalitarian nightmare to most westerners, their is only one cultural viewpoint or outcome possible, or its isolated walkabout for you fella.

sure their are good leaders, ones who make villiage life ideallic, but....

from my perspective the entire left/communist side of politics is the craving of this situation - everyone in their place, doing their bit for the village under the wise leadership of the bigman.

just like singapore!

more than this, the modern west is lots of different "tribes" with radically different perspectives on whats shared and whats personal - how can anything but libertarian deal with this complexity, anything less is demanding everyone else conform to your perspective.

im kinda getting lost in extreme language with these conversations most of the time anyway - capitalism gets reduced to facism, socialism to communism and in reality we all come with culture that has shared stuff and personal stuff... for me its just about keeping the personal choices alive, dont care what its called.

[skyhook77sfg]

BELIEVE THE WORD YOU'RE LOOKING FOR IS FREEDOM...

[Mr. Perfect]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Mr. Perfect]

[noddy]

well, the nuance im looking for is how do more collectivist types and more individualist types both have FREEDOM in the same system ;P

ideally, a "libertarian" environment lets people build collectives to their tastes with each group having its own set of rules on cultural specifics - if you cant find a collective that suits you, maybe its look in the mirror time.

im not that fussed by ideology, im a bit dry and pragmatic and think i need to work with the people outside my front door - for me its usually about remote authortity more than specifics of system, for all the fuss made about those collectives and individuals that fail - most of us, most of the time, do make things work with the people outside our doors, and deserve to be left in charge of our own lives.

[Mr. Perfect]

[skyhook77sfg]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Mr. Perfect]

[skyhook77sfg]

maybe you should read the book....


before you attempt to negate a brilliant scholarly opus.


just a thought.


as to wealth and how much is too much if you have to ask it wont matter what anyone tells yoju.

note you prefer to reach for OT guidance when there is a newer covenant for believers in that mode...

did you free your slaves in the last jubilee year?

[Demon of Undoing]

First off , lets avoid lumping all natives in America. A Commanche chief might be able to carry off a bit of the tyrant bit , but that shit would get you attacked on the spot by family and clan among Cherokee. Cherokee were democratic as you'd like , to the point where you just about couldn't be forced to do anything but leave. You might get knifed by somebody for grudges , but that's just doin' business in the South, it's not tyranny.

Second , yes , I do get what Tinker is saying about property rights , and actually feel them on a level that makes me question our understanding of epigenetics and how memories are transferred. At any rate, it has to be understood that thinking in terms of buying and selling land and the idea of property rights requires whole reams of assumptions about reality and our place in it. Simply put , the abstractions that a title deed implies were to natives as a whole not even wrong.

As it was said , how can you sell your mother ? The idea of signing things that were not theirs but a gift to them was just too strange. More accurately , it would be for them like trying to sell the college education your parents paid for. Not leverage it as labor , but actually sell the experience , the diploma , tge wages , the comfortable retirement , all of it They would trade for rights to travel through or hunt in an area. But to actually sell the fucking place ? Are you nuts ? I want a total valuation of all action verbs in the English language. If I don't like the price , I will just kill you and erase your language.

Do you people get why I have so many freaking anger issues yet ? On a level deeper than I can express , just about your whole getup is an absurd and abominable trick. 'S alright. Wasn't your idea , it's fucking you, too.

But before we all break out our copies of "Dances With Wolves" , do understand the assumptions of the native position. There were no property rights , per se. You couldn't just kill someone for being in your lodge , that would be as nonsensical as being killed for wearing purple ( that modern fact would confuse the shit out of them too until the modern tribe structure was explained). However , while there was no law saying this belonged to this guy and that couldn't be walked on , it was only because there really wasn't much of a law, period. More correctly , there was no sense of a rule of law. You couldn't be legally justified for killing a man in your bedroom , but nobody would give a damn if you did it for whatever reason that might be named . Except for kin and clan , there was nobody to create much of a sense of right or wrong.

Similarly , the property beliefs about the land were a byproduct of plenty and a complete lack of any redress of greivance beyond opprobrium. As a result , people killed strangers on their accustomed hunting lands all the time. Again , agreements existed , but the incursion on another tribes hunting stock was a constant source of training for the young warrior and a steady source of lives ended more often by violence than pestilence. The myth that the natives had no diseases that they didnt have a cure for partially comes from the fact that many tribes tried to stay as isolated from strangers as possible. Most were simply killed outright.

By any modern standard , their way was not superior. I'm not entirely convinced modern standards are worth a fuck. All the high mindedness and rational goodness of enlightend blabby blabber blab won't mean shit if it leads to a biodiversity crash unlike anything this side of the Precambrian. I'll be real impressed with the commitment to sanitation when the oceans are a desert and the land looks like a rusted skillet. Maybe most of us are supposed to be dead from axe wounds and toothaches already in order to keep us from breeding out of control. Life isn't necessarily a straight line, striggt lines eventually end and are no more . Indeed the Chinese see evil spirits as preferring straight lines. I prefer hoops.

Happy Tuesday. Now get off my lawn.

[skyhook77sfg]

FEELING A BIT FEISTY ARE WE?

happy dam tuesday to you too even though its monday....


glad to see an authoritative elaboration on my simple statements about lack of property right concepts as natural law in native american culture ....

[noddy]

land ownership from the anglo side of things is actually protecting the little guy historically.. its the legal concept that punishes the powerful for just "taking"...

the pacific islanders dont have strict boundaries so much, but do have areas they control close to their villages where they can kill the "other" without blinking.

the aborigines is lots of different things, some more like the pacific people with vague "controlled" areas, some completely nomadic with no ownership at all.

[Mr. Perfect]

[skyhook77sfg]

OK MR PEE

even though I asked you to describe your belief system first

here are my thoughts about what you asked....


not that we're going to get real chummy or tings off dat nachur....



freedom is my holy grail....

loss of liberty is a far greater calamity than loss of life.

but freedom not just from any external form of oppression by others

but freedom of action based upon independence

but even more important freedom from internal compulsions of ego.

as to how much is too much, having known both an overflowing cup

and an empty one, true peace within and without arises elsewhere,

perhaps in the parable from the teaching on the mount that advises

regard the birds of the air that sow not and reap not yet they live...


in the words of the mind that stirred the giants that went before us

Washington Jefferson Madison Franklin and your favorite Henry...



"The World is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion."

Thomas Paine

[Mr. Perfect]

[skyhook77sfg]

you seem only to be interested in picking everyone apart like a disturbed child pulling wings off of flies.

not my idea of productive dialogue.

pick another victim please.

at least for a little while.

please.

[Mr. Perfect]

[Simple Minded]

[noddy]

[Tinker]

[Tinker]