You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: “Defining Voluntaryism” - No, private property is not “optional” (addressing @lukestokes)
I think this is far less subjective than the current paradigm of “I’m a special leader, that’s mine” but there are of course gray areas.
However, where Luke’s claim is concerned, no. That is not gray at all. I am a self-owner. Consent necessitates self-ownership (private property).
Please, do not misrepresent my actual views. My actual views on private property related to my comment deal directly with the complexities of land ownership. That was one of our original disagreements regarding national parks, if you remember. If I wasn't clear about my views, please ask for clarification.
I did. Only to be told I was not focusing on ideas and principles, but people. My reply to @novacadian is about the fact that ISO is private property. I did not say there were no gray areas in regard to private property issues. It is not hard to understand. Thanks for your input.