Monday, February 8, 2016

An Inside Comment on Private Property Society Theory

From a well-placed libertarian:
Just wanted to send you a quick note. Throughout the years I've always agreed with you on the controversial topics that you've covered, whether it be bitcoin or IP. I have to say that not only do I agree with you on the PPS concepts that you've been writing about recently, but this may be your crown jewel. Bitcoin and IP were mere warm-ups compared to significance of PPS. Keep up your brilliant work!

Oh...and Private Property Society is an incredible way to describe it too....Let's see the bastards co-opt that one!


  1. So he agrees with you on PPS in which the only value that you have enunciated is that 1. There is no due process do the mere assertion of an NAP violation is sufficient for retribution and 2. That it's cool to kill a kid for stealing an apple (or even have sex with the child to exact "justice"). I guess I'm just an ordinary guy but that sounds reprehensible.

    As for IP, I've seen you write and debate on it and the only concrete proposal about IP that I have seen from is that it should be of unlimited duration. Is this the brilliant innovation to which he refers?

    Your IP ideas and your PPS have great synergy. Now we can execute kids for their NAP violation of downloading a song from the internet.

    1. no the issues are quite different. the seller can spell the conditions he will sell it to you in the contract and that might involve restrictions on copying or reselling.
      the PPS is very different more I'm the sovereign on my property so anything that displeases me is an act of lese majeste.

  2. What's a well-placed libertarian? Is it the opposite of a misplaced one?

  3. I'm waiting to hear Block reply to RW's post on 2/8 entitled: "A Reply to Walter Block on Anarcho-Capitalism". This is getting interesting. It would also be nice to get Hoppe's opinion on Wenzel's PPS.

  4. Today on LRC, Laurence Vance has an article where he draws a line to decide who are "real" libertarians. He lists about 50 questions for the reader to answer. It can be found here:

    "If you answered that you should decide these questions then you are a libertarian—whether you call yourself a libertarian. If you answered that the government should decide these questions then you are a statist—whether you call yourself a Democrat, a Republican, a liberal, a conservative, a moderate, a progressive, a populist, a neoconservative, a democratic socialist, a centrist, an independent, or non-partisan. If you answered that the government should decide most of these questions then you are simply an inconsistent statist."

    Minarchists are inconsistent statists.

    " a free society, you decide. In an authoritarian society, the government decides. Libertarians believe in a free society. Statists believe in a society heavily controlled by legislation, laws, regulations, judges, bureaucrats, ordinances, prisons, violence, force, aggression, coercion, badges, and guns.

    I will take the free society."

    I will too, Laurence- with one exception:

    "I have indeed given up on anarcho capitalism. I am now a minarchist. I see two legitimate roles for government. First, to force, compel, require, that everyone read Human Action and Man, Economy and State. Second, pass a law requiring all publishers, when they reprint a book, to maintain the same pagination as the older versions."

    --Walter "Moderate" Block: