Molyneux' FDR controversy is going too far

[Tom Sawyer]

The Ambassadors tolerance is widely known...


Off with the fingers!

[BillKauffman]

you're just cut & pasting

I have never cut and pasted any of my posts.

[John Edward Mercier]

Bill, if we printed out every post where you stated that, word for word, just as you did just now, AGAIN, and placed them all edge to edge, you could cover the surface of the Earth with them three times over. Some would argue you had legitimately homesteaded the Earth and you could have your way. Personally, I would call bullshit because you're just cut & pasting.

Oh, and if anyone new and as yet ignorant of your borderline autistic affliction engages you in this discussion, AGAIN, and creates another endless thread about economic rent filled with your tired old cut & paste arguments that never convinced a single person here, AGAIN, I will personally violate the NAP by coming over to their place and chopping off their typing fingers.

I think he's not quite getting his point across.

He's trying to explain Proudhon's treatise on property. Proudhon was a voluntaryist and developed his ideas on property ownership by watching animals usage of natural resources. He worked very hard to equate it within an economic system, but was unable to without resorting to coercive government.

[BillKauffman]

A baby (or a dog) immediately shows clear signs of completely losing interest in an object that it was enraptured with the moment it passes out of sight until it reaches the age when its mind is capable of comprehending that it still exists.

So what age does a dog have to be to comprehend this and how do you know beyond a reasonable doubt?

Whether you think the NAP is natural or not, are you saying you don't believe in it? What do you base your morality on?

The universal ethic that I posted earlier.

Do you want me to cut and paste it?

[Giggan]

The extent of my knowledge of Proudhon is what I've heard from socialists calling themselves anarchists, but doesn't he cease to be a voluntaryist when he claims a means of production cannot be owned by an individual?

A voluntaryist with exceptions isn't a volunatryist to me.

[BillKauffman]

The extent of my knowledge of Proudhon is what I've heard from socialists calling themselves anarchists, but doesn't he cease to be a voluntaryist when he claims a means of production cannot be owned by an individual?

A voluntaryist with exceptions isn't a volunatryist to me.

Is this some sort of non-sequitur?

[dalebert]

I have never cut and pasted any of my posts.

Maybe not with your computer software, but if not, you have a cut & paste function in whatever part of your brain you use for discussing controversial topics.

[John Edward Mercier]

The extent of my knowledge of Proudhon is what I've heard from socialists calling themselves anarchists, but doesn't he cease to be a voluntaryist when he claims a means of production cannot be owned by an individual?

A voluntaryist with exceptions isn't a volunatryist to me.

The Means of Production in Proudhon's day would be much different than what you and I would comprehend it to be.
He doesn't mean that an individual could not own tools or personal property... he was referencing the natural resources required to make the tools. Since the natural resources did not spring from the individuals labor (self-ownership) he/she would not have exclusive use of natural resources.

[KBCraig]

How do you know the creature "realizes" anything let alone that of an object it can't see anymore?

"For tonight's lame coffee house production, the role of Jean-Paul Sartre will be played by BillKauffman!"

[BillKauffman]

The extent of my knowledge of Proudhon is what I've heard from socialists calling themselves anarchists, but doesn't he cease to be a voluntaryist when he claims a means of production cannot be owned by an individual?

A voluntaryist with exceptions isn't a volunatryist to me.

The Means of Production in Proudhon's day would be much different than what you and I would comprehend it to be.
He doesn't mean that an individual could not own tools or personal property... he was referencing the natural resources required to make the tools. Since the natural resources did not spring from the individuals labor (self-ownership) he/she would not have exclusive use of natural resources.

Proudhon believed in the occupancy and use (possession) requirement for "property" like modern day mutualists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutualism_(economic_theory)


excerpt:

Mutualism is an anarchist school of thought which can be traced to the writings of Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, who envisioned a society where each person might possess a means of production, either individually or collectively, with trade representing equivalent amounts of labor in the free market.

<snip>

Insofar as they ensure the workers right to the full product of their labor, mutualists support markets and private property in the product of labor. However, they argue for conditional titles to land, whose private ownership is legitimate only so long as it remains in use or occupation (which Proudhon called "possession.")

[John Edward Mercier]

The last I knew... land was a natural resource.