The Peace Academy Curriculum //The Non-Agression Principle // Part 6
The Detrimental Government Disregard of Property Rights
The Homesteading principle states that First Use of any resource or unoccupied land is recognized as the rightful owner until that owner chooses to sell or abandon that resource.
It is possible to peacefully resolve conflicts and establish borders and claim to property without Government coercion.
Working together, respecting and recognizing ownership and productive output, as well as peaceful negotiations regarding borders all create harmonious order which can be achieved through private enterprise without the use of force and coercion by Government entities. We see versions of that thorughout history in tribal economies, gift economies, and now in crypto economies.
The unfortunate reality is that Governments aggressively and forcefully establish boundaries, often without the consent of the people and without any concern for the harm or impact they are having on those people.
A prime example is the European invasion of the Americas during the 16th and 17th centuries.
This land was taken by force without any consideration for the rightful property owners and homesteaders.
This heinous Government disregard for property rights has continued throughout the centuries across the world and is still happening today. Nearly all of their actions today represent various versions of financial harm to the many for the benefit of the few.
In order to live by the principles of Non-agression, Peace, and Liberty, we need to understand that property rights are absolutely necessary and are the foundation for all other rights.
The violation of property rights by Government entities is just another example of what we collectively need to remove our consent from.
These artificial borders really are a big problem
Especially now what the peoples of the Middle East are suffering
Great post.
True talk. The government needs to see this. They need to know that conflict musnt always end cases especially land cases. The masses too need be informed that peace is very inevitable in our everyday lives.
#saynotoconflict
#embracepeace
I know
Just as @brightex correctly said, the government has it on their hands to create an atmosphere that fosters the mentality that land cases can be settled amicably without matters getting out of hand.
Thanks @aggroed
Heh very interestingly told the author of the post!)The boundaries of ownership will always be drawn by the government!Whether it's america europe or russia!But here's the example of America, there and now the Indians as prisoners...We are ordinary people, we do not create laws, they are created by the government!Well, we live by these rules like it or not!
Agree. Governments just want their hand on everything. People must understand in order to change things!
Unfortunately no government is following the pristine principle of equality, freedom and fraternity. Heavy price is to be paid by weak or those with less means through financial, life or property loss.
I really respect your concern and regard for every individual and his thinking and choices.
You remind me of the islands in Maine. My dad used to have a mobile law office and he took it to the islands sometimes. There is almost no government, except what people make for themselves. The problem is when people move to the island and deside to break the unwritten rules of the islanders; going by other laws the islanders disreguard. Sometimes their rules might seem stringent ,but they keep their lives in order. Even if you marry into an island the lobsterman might not allow you to set traps there.
Hi @aggroed - sorry for the delay in responding to this - it's a really interesting post, but my week's been a bit of a storm of deadlines.
I think it's great that you acknowledge and promote this principle. I certainly think that indigenous Australians would be inclined to agree, seeing as European colonisation was certainly not undertaken with anything resembling consent from those people who were most certainly here first (by quite a margin).
I'd be interested to hear where you stand on notions of the rectification of injustice. I don't know if you've read much Robert Nozick, but his idea of justice seems pretty similar/compatible with a lot of what you're taking about.
Basically, Nozick says:
This relies on three principles:
A principle of justice in acquisition - You are entitled to something, e.g.: natural resources, if no one has ever owned it before. This includes being first on the land as per the Homesteading Principle, but also the more general idea of mixing your labour with un-owned natural materials.
A principle of justice in transfer - you are entitled to something transferred to you by another person if and only if they transferred it to you fully voluntarily. (Thus Nozick was not a big fan of taxation).
A principle of rectification of injustice - People who have had their stuff/holdings/property etc. taken away from them in violation of the previous principles (e.g.: murder, mugging, looting, coercive tax regimes, illicit coercion in general, fraud, enslavement, theft etc.) have a claim against the beneficiaries of these injustices.
This principle of rectification is tricky to work out in historical cases, and Nozick himself never fully fleshed out the idea (to my satisfaction at least), perhaps this is why it's so often overlooked by people who claim to be in favour of the minimal state. Either way, it's a pretty sound idea - if you steal something, you aren't entitled to it, and the person you stole it from is entitled to get something (if not the original thing) back.
Wow, that was a little longer than I intended to write - maybe I should have just put it in a post! Anyway, I hope you make it far enough down the comments to at least see it.
This is really informative and great article about Property Rights @aggroed. All the points are true that you have mentioned. I am agree with your opinions. Thanks for sharing this useful post.
The government has no purpose but to maintain property (the right to own property) But if the people were robbed of the people, it was a peaceful government "There was primitive communism, when food grew without cultivation, and man was able to live with no hard labor, but when work began communism ended, because man took his own property, something of value to him. Source "99%" of all physical values. Thanks for the article
Very well said, especially the property rights part. We should be at peace with each other and most importantly with ourselves. That’s why I’ve started meditating, to reconnect with myself and know who I am, and we all should do that
true preposition
But what happens when eminent domain comes into play?
On another subject-
I lived in a condo years ago and we had HOA fees. I was written up for having two tomato plants and two cucumber plants growing my garden bed- keep in mind I was responsible for the weeding in this garden bed area also. I kept the weeds out but the HOA board members fined me for the vegetable plants. It was pathetic. I saw the HOA board as a small government dictating to me what I could or couldn't do. I actually fought the fines, and won, because they couldn't prove within their guidelines of the community that my plants were blight. That's what they called them- blight.
We have since moved and are planning to go further out in the next two years where no neighbors or other entity can rule our homestead.