07-09-2016, 05:19 PM
(07-09-2016, 04:57 PM)Odin Wrote: Well that escalated quickly...
(07-09-2016, 04:46 PM)Webmaster Wrote: I don’t have a problem with conservative ideas, it only become a problem when people start talking about each other in a threatening manner. I suspect that a lot of people will find Odin’s views on property extreme and a certainly have no problem with people disagreeing with them. I’m not even sure that his views of property even apply to a single person business like yours anyway but he’ll have to speak for himself.
The far-left generally has no problem with sole-proprietorships as long as they are small and employing mostly family.
(07-09-2016, 05:06 PM)Odin Wrote:(07-09-2016, 04:56 PM)Drakus79 Wrote: The example of animals defending their own territory is "private property" even going by the convenient "let's move the goalpost" Marxist definition.
Humans are social animals, not solitary animals where each organism has it's own territory. In hunter-gatherer societies there are only group territories, not "property".
Your ignorance isn't surprising, though, one has to be ignorant of sociology, anthropology, and archeology to be a Libertarian, as I said eariler, it's warmed-over 18th century social contract ideology mixed in with simplistic Victorian Era Social-Darwinist misunderstandings of natural selection and Darwinian Evolution.
From wikipedia
Quote:Personal property is generally considered property that is movable,[1] as opposed to real property or real estate.
I still don't see how an animal defending his territory from predators is fundamentally different than a man with a gun defending his private property defending his land from invaders (despite the fact that the man with the gun might have a signed deed).
When I read Marx he defined personal property as petit property (or petty property), but it's really just an arbitrary difference of scale that's not clearly defined and a way for Marxists to move the goalposts and say "you can keep this, but we get to take this away from you".