Re: Property
Mon, 14 Dec 1998 10:15:29 -0700

"Samael" <> writes:

<<<- -----Original Message-----
From: <> To: <> Date: 11 December 1998 17:50
Subject: Property [was Re: The Education Function]

>I think most people understand the idea of property as involving the right
>to exclusive control over the use or disposition of an item, acquired
>either by

  1. extracting an unowned resource or by
  2. legitimate (i.e. uncoerced) transfer from someone who previously owned
    >What exactly is your objection to property as usually defined?

If you trace back (2) through its chain of ownership, you end up back at (1).

(1) is theft. An unowned resource is available for the use of anyone. One it is claimed nobody else may use it. Obviously theft.

Therefore, by your own definition, all property is theft.

As I've pointed out already, you're contradicting yourself. There can't be theft where there is no property.

Why, precisely, do you think it's wrong to appropriate an unowned resource? Who's being wronged, and exactly how? Please avoid nebulous references to "the people" or the "common good"; I don't speak that language. We exist as individuals, not as some mystical collective entity.