A Theoretical Jew-Hating Neighbor

[DanielMuffinburg]

@capitalist

@thelion

If you show you genitals to someone who doesn’t want them, won’t he refuse to do business with you? Or worse, kick (!) you.

a) In an an-cap society, wouldn’t the kick be considered an act of aggression, while the running around with my genitals exposed be considered a non aggressive act of self-expression? I think the kicker would be at fault, not the nudist.

b) For a pervert hiding his identity with a mask, the threat of people refusing to do business with him provides very little disincentive to discourage him from exposing himself to children

Lol. Showing your penis to little kids is not “self-expression” if the owner of the property on which the act is made says it ain’t so.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@JonBostwick

@capitalist

Yes, the flag is technically on his property, but aren’t the realms of his property vs my property vs public property (i.e. air and sunlight) not so clearly defined?

… If his flag is casting a detrimental amount of shade on your property then you would have case, but then you’ve just changed the goal posts. If shade was the conflict it wouldnt matter what was written on the flag.

This.

[capitalist]

@JonBostwick

If his flag is casting a detrimental amount of shade on your property then you would have case, but then you’ve just changed the goal posts. If shade was the conflict it wouldnt matter what was written on the flag.

Let’s say that shade is the conflict, not the content on the flag. If the flag is raised 100 feet in the air, albeit still on his property, and casts shade on my house (which I dislike), would I be justified in calling for state intervention to coerce him into at least lowering the flag? Would that change your answer as opposed to the swastika flag example?

[bbnet]

Instead of petitioning the government, consider turning the house into a Hebrew Temple

להרוג ובחסד

[Bostwick]

@capitalist

a) In an an-cap society, wouldn’t the kick be considered an act of aggression, while the running around with my genitals exposed be considered a non aggressive act of self-expression? I think the kicker would be at fault, not the nudist.

That’s up to whoever owns the land the nudist is standing on to decide.

But even more basically than that, a flasher who is deliberately provoking his victim probably would deserve a kick.

[capitalist]

@Daniel

@capitalist

@thelion

If you show you genitals to someone who doesn’t want them, won’t he refuse to do business with you? Or worse, kick (!) you.

a) In an an-cap society, wouldn’t the kick be considered an act of aggression, while the running around with my genitals exposed be considered a non aggressive act of self-expression? I think the kicker would be at fault, not the nudist.

b) For a pervert hiding his identity with a mask, the threat of people refusing to do business with him provides very little disincentive to discourage him from exposing himself to children

Lol. Showing your penis to little kids is not “self-expression” if the owner of the property on which the act is made says it ain’t so.

Let’s say that such an offense occurs tomorrow on public land, not in a theoretical an cap society. Would calling for gov’t intervention to coerce the man into covering up be just?

[thelion]

You could flash him back? Eye for an eye?

That probably wouldn’t help with flashing. He’ll probably like that…

Or just, kick him and pay a compensation. So long as you get more utility from kicking him, its OK. Gossen’s answer.

[DarkCatalyst]

Does anyone else find these the endless theoritcals and what-ifs tiring? This is all just useless speculation. We don’t know what sort of order will arise from the initial chaos of an ancap society. The best we can do is hold true to basic principles, apply them the best we can, and see how it all turns out.

[Bostwick]

@capitalist

@JonBostwick

If his flag is casting a detrimental amount of shade on your property then you would have case, but then you’ve just changed the goal posts. If shade was the conflict it wouldnt matter what was written on the flag.

Let’s say that shade is the conflict, not the content on the flag. If the flag is raised 100 feet in the air, albeit still on his property, and casts shade on my house (which I dislike), would I be justified in calling for state intervention to coerce him into at least lowering the flag? Would that change your answer as opposed to the swastika flag example?

That’s a much deeper question of the legitamacy of employing the state as an agent.

First, a person does have the right to sunlight or rainfall or stream water or other preexisting condition on his property (A person can’t homestead up stream of a previous owner and dam up the stream, thats established common law). Second, typically involving state gunmen in a dispute is not a proportional response.

The optimal solution would involve direct dealings with the neighbor, second would be involment of civil law. I suppose a person could call in the local sheriff to resolve the matter if he was willing to take responsibility should the sheriff end up murdering the neighbor, though I’m not sure a sheriff would care until a court order was made (unless the flag was against local ordnance, maybe).

[thelion]

DarkCatalyst replied on 12-08-2009 9:00 PM

“Does anyone else find these the endless theoritcals and what-ifs tiring? This is all just useless speculation. We don’t know what sort of order will arise from the initial chaos of an ancap society. The best we can do is hold true to basic principles, apply them the best we can, and see how it all turns out.”

Economics is all about what-if’s, however.

Its closer to symbolic logic, and then to discrete mathematics, than anything else.

[DanielMuffinburg]

@capitalist

@Daniel

@capitalist

@thelion

If you show you genitals to someone who doesn’t want them, won’t he refuse to do business with you? Or worse, kick (!) you.

a) In an an-cap society, wouldn’t the kick be considered an act of aggression, while the running around with my genitals exposed be considered a non aggressive act of self-expression? I think the kicker would be at fault, not the nudist.

b) For a pervert hiding his identity with a mask, the threat of people refusing to do business with him provides very little disincentive to discourage him from exposing himself to children

Lol. Showing your penis to little kids is not “self-expression” if the owner of the property on which the act is made says it ain’t so.

Let’s say that such an offense occurs tomorrow on public land, not in a theoretical an cap society. Would calling for gov’t intervention to coerce the man into covering up be just?

Why not do it yourself?

[capitalist]

@Daniel

Why not do it yourself?

How?

[DanielMuffinburg]

@capitalist

@Daniel

Why not do it yourself?

How?

Another irony: We wouldn’t be in this problem about public places if it wasn’t for the state. That’s another strike against the state. Lol.

[capitalist]

@Daniel

@capitalist

@Daniel

Why not do it yourself?

How?

Another irony: We wouldn’t be in this problem about public places if it wasn’t for the state. That’s another strike against the state. Lol.

Agreed. I guess what I am trying to get at is how to live one’s life as a true libertarian in an unfree nation. Is attempting to avoid public roads and schools virtuous, worthwhile, or even possible?

[Capital_Pumper]

@DarkCatalyst

Does anyone else find these the endless theoritcals and what-ifs tiring?

No, its all been overshadowed by the growing consensus in this thread: wallowing in self-pity or someone offending your sense of aesthetics justifies roshamboing people.

[Harry_Felker]

@E. R. Olovetto

I agree that “public” can be referred to rather as “stolen” for all we care. I don’t see your point in using “unobtainable”. A thing can be owned or not, and to own different things has different requirements (again, all I care to consider is the model of aprioristic libertarian law). What is unobtainable that has to do with property?

unobtainable is unable to be owned property, I was referring to his perceived ownership of sunlight…

[Solid_Choke]

@capitalist

I am a blossoming anarcho-capitalist and my friend is a Huckabee-type republican. Today we were having a discussion about local governments and he asked me the following:

“Let’s say you have lived in a neighborhood for years and your next-door neighbor Jim (who just moved in a week ago) insists upon publicly expressing his anti-Semitic views. On his front yard he has erected a giant Nazi flag with a swastika symbol, he has ‘Death to the Jews’ painted in large, red letters all over his house, etc. You are have been trying to sell your house for months and since Jim has moved in you have noticed the price of your home has drastically dropped by X dollars, presumably due to his self-expression.”

Would it be unjust for me, a libertarian, to petition for government involvement in this conflict on the grounds that my neighbor has ‘harmed’ me by the amount of X dollars? In an anarco-capitalist society how would this problem be dealt with?

I was at a loss for words and would appreciate the help of the forum. Thanks.

How about this version:

Let’s say you have lived in a neighborhood for years and your next-door neighbor Jim (who just moved in a week ago) is black. He sits on his front porch with his family (who are black) and listens to load music created by black musicians. You have been trying to sell your house for months and since Jim has moved in you have noticed the price of your home has drastically dropped by X dollars, presumably due to his race.

Would it be unjust for me, a libertarian, to petition for government involvement in this conflict on the grounds that my neighbor has ‘harmed’ me by the amount of X dollars?

Does that help clarify things?

[Harry_Felker]

@capitalist

Agreed. I guess what I am trying to get at is how to live one’s life as a true libertarian in an unfree nation. Is attempting to avoid public roads and schools virtuous, worthwhile, or even possible?

That is pointless, how to live ones life as a true libertarian in an unfree society is to convince people they are not really free and offer them your views on what would be free…

I would be remiss to not mention…

Be persuasive about it, please…

[Capital_Pumper]

@capitalist

Would it be unjust for me, a libertarian, to petition for government involvement in this conflict on the grounds that my neighbor has ‘harmed’ me by the amount of X dollars? In an anarco-capitalist society how would this problem be dealt with?

Do you think you have the right to impose your will on someone else because he utilized his property in a manner breathe that influenced the subjective valuations of others to your disliking? If you do then prepare to take a ride on the dreaded slippery slope of undesirable implications.

[marquise]

@capitalist

Would it be unjust for me, a libertarian, to petition for government involvement in this conflict on the grounds that my neighbor has ‘harmed’ me by the amount of X dollars? In an anarco-capitalist society how would this problem be dealt with?

First, what is unjust for you, only you can know. It is all about how your actions level to your thinking.

Second, I really don’t see how a sentence can hold “libertarian” and “petition for government involvement”, unless the word “against” is in between.

Third, in an an-cap society your guy would never buy a house in a neighborhood that hasn’t the same sick ideas as his, knowing perfectly that he would be ostracized.

And last, but not least, your example is a fallacy. If I choose to stay naked in my swimming pool on my property should my neighbor send a petition to the government because I am offending his prudishness?