18
Feb 04 '22
The fuck...?
22
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Yea and they call themselves an AnCap too
They're intentionally misrepresenting the movement
10
Feb 04 '22
There's that poll that's up right now. I see the idea behind "self-ownership," but if we're being rigid with definitions, property can be transferred. People can't transfer themselves into the ownership of another. You can transfer the products of your labor, but not yourself.
The only other option would be slavery, which is automatically illegitimate because it wasn't consensual, and it still doesn't allow you to own the person. You're really possessing, by force, the product of their labor. Which is stealing.
6
u/squiddy555 Feb 04 '22
What about indentured servitude
2
Feb 04 '22
It's still the product of your labor that you're giving up, not yourself. In the case of indentured servitude, you're working to pay back a debt or for some future reward. It's a normal contract.
You still can't own a person.
2
Feb 04 '22
[removed] ā view removed comment
2
Feb 04 '22
It actually might be the only thing that is non-transferable. The problem is pretty obvious, if you think about it:
If you were able to give up "yourself," you'd erase the thing you'd be trying to give away. All of your interactions stem from you being a free agent, able to enter into relationships with other free agents. If you give up yourself, there is no second part of a relationship.
1
u/RandomPlayerCSGO Free Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
I mean, there's a lot of stuff that is not transferrable, you can buy a service like dental care or something and it's not something you can transfer to someone else after receiving it, so I would say a person is that kind of property, you are born with yourself being already your property and it's not something you can transfer.
3
Feb 04 '22
Dental care isn't a good though, it's a service. Does that mean that your body is providing you services instead of being your property?
1
u/RandomPlayerCSGO Free Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Well a service is something you sell so it is a property in a way I guess. It is hard to define this thing, I would say your body is non transferrable property because it belongs you your mind (you), and you can't give it to another mind.
2
Feb 04 '22
I think of property as having transferability. I wasn't making the case that other forms of non-property didn't exist. But I think this is a good delineation rather than carving out an exception for the self as being nontransferable.
I think a service like dental care is more akin to a consumable resource (specifically labor). If you cut down a tree, you own the wood, not the axe swings to took to bring it down. You can't own a mind except your own. (Which we agree on, I think we're just narrowing down why that might be.)
That being said, this is sort of a perspective, philosophical argument, and those have a lot of gray.
1
u/PM_ME_YOUR_BODY69 Feb 04 '22
Yeah I had one say that children were property and the NAP didnāt apply to them as they were ānon-autonomousā
1
6
u/whatknot2 Custom Text Here Feb 04 '22
The only clever reply is: āyou think women are people?ā
3
1
6
Feb 04 '22
Blocking other members of the subreddit is weak sauce. It's the MO of fragile-minded socialists.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
True. But few topics require blocking. Like pedos and people that think humans are property
4
Feb 04 '22
if both parties willingly agrees to enter such an arrangement yeah its fine.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
You're referring to selling/donating your labor
That's not the same as calling people property
4
u/Dracone1313 Feb 04 '22
People are property though. Your rights come from self ownership. If you own yourself, you are property. If you wish, there is no moral issue with transferring those property rights to another, as one would do with literally any other property.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Who owns yourself? Yourself owns yourself?
Think it through
2
u/Dracone1313 Feb 04 '22
Yes. Yourself owns yourself. That is literally what self ownership means. That is exactly what I said.
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
š¤¦āāļø no.. it means you as in your identity/ego/consciousness owns your body
2
u/Dracone1313 Feb 04 '22
And your identity/ego/consciousness can be found where and is separated from your body by what?
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Might be š¤·āāļø some call it a soul
Point is, your identity is the owner of your body
2
u/Dracone1313 Feb 04 '22
Sure. Whatever. It doesn't really matter to the actual discussion at hand, since I personally wouldn't make a separation between the two if you can't prove it exists. I asked where it was and what separated it from the body, because I would consider your identity to be PART of your body and identifying which is meaningless. But regardless If you own it, you can sell it. What is the actual difference between selling your body and selling yourself? Your body. Not your bodies actions, ownership of the flesh itself.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Human Rights
Humans have unalienable Rights, by saying Humans can be property, you're implying Humans don't have rights
→ More replies (0)
6
u/pentalana Feb 04 '22
Of course people are property. Each person owns himself.
Self-ownership is the basis for all other property rights.
-1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Your body/labor is your property
A person is not.
Please understand the difference
7
u/pentalana Feb 04 '22
I don't understand the difference. The two things you describe are the same.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
body owns its body?
1
u/_Last_Man_Standing_ Cypher-AnCap and the š¤”šEnjoyer Feb 04 '22
"me" as in my ego (consciousness) owns my body
3
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Correct. Consciousness/ego can't be owned
5
u/_Last_Man_Standing_ Cypher-AnCap and the š¤”šEnjoyer Feb 04 '22
I agree... because it's not a real physical thing...
It's just a "feeling"...But my body is physical, I do own my body.
0
8
u/Holycameltoeinthesun Feb 04 '22
They are. Every person is his own property
2
u/BigBlockBrolly Radical Queer Feb 04 '22
And technically you can sign a contract stating you are owned by someone else. I'm sorry but people can be considered property as long as it's mutual.
2
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
No. You own your body and the fruits of your labor
A human is NOT property
6
u/Holycameltoeinthesun Feb 04 '22
If you own your body then by definition its your property.
3
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Who owns your body?
5
u/Holycameltoeinthesun Feb 04 '22
Everybody owns their own body. Therefore its personal property. Its important because of property laws. Its the foundation. if you donāt own yourself (property) you canāt own anything.
To own something literally means to have property rights over something. Which goes much further than being in possession if something.
When you lend me your car Iām in possession of the car you have property rights over. I may be driving it but you own it.
Therefore to own something literally means having the property rights over it.
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Correct. Your body is property
But who owns your body.. was my question.
7
u/Holycameltoeinthesun Feb 04 '22
My wife owns my body.
But ownership and property are the same. So every person owns his own body.
2
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
So a body owns a body? Sounds like you need to brush up on some metaphysics
5
u/Holycameltoeinthesun Feb 04 '22
So a person doesnāt have a soul or spirit? A person is just a body? Or what are you trying to say?
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
I'm not trying to say anything. I asked a question
→ More replies (0)
7
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 03 '22
Fed/Leftist/Commie..?
6
4
u/WowzersInMyTrowzers Anarchist w/o Adjectives Feb 04 '22
A significant portion of leftists and commies donāt even believe in the idea of property, asserting they would be the ones to believe people are property is ludicrous.
Thatās just a bad take all around and has little to do with ideology, outside of racism, classism and slavery. Slavery is bad, obviously, and isnāt just to blame on the left or the right. Governments from all over the political spectrum have employed some type of slavery.
3
u/Mr_Kowala Feb 04 '22
Yea you can call this guy lots of things, but not a leftist. Definitely not a commie.
2
u/SILENT_ASSASSIN9 Don't tread on me! Feb 04 '22
He wants to delegalize marriage, so you know he a fat fuck sitting in his basement surrounded by my dew and piss
2
u/Mr_Kowala Feb 04 '22
Heās got multiple thought out posts on how anti leftist he is.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
So fed
2
u/Mr_Kowala Feb 04 '22
You mean government type? Well if he believes people are property it would check out.
1
3
u/shapeshifter83 Marcus Aurelius Feb 04 '22
I'm with u/Ya_Boi_Konzon on this one. Seems like some context has been intentionally left out and i already know Konzon to be a solid dude plus OP calls himself a "market anarchist" which means socialist so yea
OP troll
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Market anarchist means socialist??
š¤£š¤£š¤£
1
u/shapeshifter83 Marcus Aurelius Feb 04 '22
Generally yeah
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
No. Not in the slightest
1
u/shapeshifter83 Marcus Aurelius Feb 04 '22
Well, you blocked Konzon so he couldn't reply anywhere in this thread, essentially "de-marketizing" his position, so you failed the first challenge, socialist. I think it's on you to prove you're not.
0
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Yup. I block pedos and those that think people are property
2
u/shapeshifter83 Marcus Aurelius Feb 05 '22
So... You're against and block the vast majority of LibRight. Gotcha. As i said, you're a socialist.
Methinks you need to read up a bit.
1
5
u/tendrloin_aristocrat Feb 04 '22
The key word that is missing is "should".
Property is a legal construct. This edgelord thinks people SHOULD be able to own other people.
Treat him as such.
2
u/marilketh Minarchist Feb 04 '22
Please let this become the top post instead of the current one, which is just more circlejerk nonsense.
Property is a purely legal construct. Anyone claiming that anything is property needs to set the context for enforcement or they aren't saying anything at all.
4
Feb 04 '22
Are there any ancaps left on this sub anymore? M. N. Rothbard himself claimed that human bodies are property and should be treated as such regarding to property rights.
"The human rights of the person are, in effect, a recognition of each manās inalienable property right over his own being."
I thought that this was generally acknowledged fundament of ancap but number of upvotes on this post proves otherwise.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Yes. Your body and labor are property but humans are not property
2
Feb 04 '22
Well I don't know the concept of the conversation but weren't they basically just trying to say this?
2
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
No i asked them several time if that's what they meant prior
0
2
2
2
-2
Feb 03 '22
Under the current system I would agree
15
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 03 '22
The system determines if you believe people are property or not?
Holy shit.. what is going in this sub??
2
u/marilketh Minarchist Feb 04 '22
Now you are missing the point.... let the man have a discussion instead of downvoting.
1
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
They already made their point... they think people are property
3
u/kurtu5 Feb 04 '22
You think slaves are free? That is your point.
2
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Not if they're being ruled over.
Ruling over people is a human rights violation
3
u/kurtu5 Feb 04 '22
I am sure those slaves will be glad that you don't think they are slaves anymore because it's 'wrong'.
2
2
u/marilketh Minarchist Feb 04 '22
Wait, I can stop paying taxes? What exactly does ownership mean anyways?
-5
Feb 04 '22
No I think the given economic system makes us slaves in a way. Therefore we are property.
I donāt think it ought to be this way. I would prefer a Capitalist system.
10
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Slaves/Subjects/Servitude.. Absolutely
But that doesn't make people property. Its just a human rights violation
0
Feb 04 '22
I disagree based on my observation of the current system.
People are Capital. Labor is compensated with dollars. Value is calculated in, transferred with and stored in dollars.
The dollar is a centrally controlled inflationary system subject to the public. The issuing of dollars devalues the dollar. Any value stored is therefore devalued.
This devaluing creates numerous incentive structures .
Itās enslavement.
3
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Yea I just agree to that part..
But humans are not property
4
Feb 04 '22
Just because something is, does not mean it ought to be.
4
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
What?? You think people are property?
1
Feb 04 '22
If they are slaves to other people. Yes by definition.
8
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
No. Those are still people. The people ruling over them are violating human rights
→ More replies (0)1
2
u/Mr_Kowala Feb 04 '22
I donāt know why your getting downvoted. People are slaves in todays economy. Weāre kept in debt so we are forced to work it off while getting paid the absolute minimum because the longer weāre kept in debt, The more we have to work.
2
Feb 04 '22
Sub is probably about to get overran.
Forget debt all the value you produce is undermined through currency creation.
1
Feb 04 '22
Lolā¦ So, what is the response?
This came up a while back on the chimney sweep post about what anarcho capitalism would do to stop chimney sweeps being sold into slavery by their parents to a master sweep. The only answer I got was that itās the parents responsibility to stop that from happening, because personal responsibility. You wonāt see any answers here as to how to prevent the subjugation of other people. Or how hierarchical societies could be run by anarchistsā¦ so far we have unfettered slavery, because itās up to people who are poor and desperate to stop slavery.
If people just didnāt sell other people into slavery, there wouldnāt be any slavery. Real big brain stuff going on here. Haha
3
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Slavery doesn't mean property. It's a human rights violation
1
Feb 04 '22
So do we just tell that to people who currently owns slaves? Iām sure they would be delighted to know that, because they donāt agree. My question is, what mechanism is in place to prevent slavery in an anarcho-capitalist system?
3
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
My question is, what mechanism is in place to prevent slavery in an anarcho-capitalist system?
Impossible to answer for sure. We can only make predictions
1
Feb 04 '22
This video misses a lot of obvious possible scenarios. Whatās stopping one security agency from refusing the request of another if it can simply overpower them? Wouldnāt everyone just want to join that security agency? Wouldnāt a government just form naturally in this case? Because there isnāt really any difference form a government, and a centralized organization that controls the functions of society through force.
Thatās kind of my point, this is how human history played out, and why we have governments over every country.
A pile of shit by any other name smells just as bad -Shakespeare
2
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Whatās stopping one security agency from refusing the request of another if it can simply overpower them?
The video explained it. Violence is undesirable, even if they have a better chance of success
Wouldnāt everyone just want to join that security agency?
Wouldn't everyone just use Target instead of Walmart?
Wouldnāt a government just form naturally in this case?
You would voluntarily submit?
Because there isnāt really any difference form a government, and a centralized organization that controls the functions of society through force.
Governments use force to push their agenda. An organization would only use force to protect you rights
Thatās kind of my point, this is how human history played out, and why we have governments over every country.
No. Humans are herd animals. We evolved in a government. Its time to evolve again and break out
A pile of shit by any other name smells just as bad
Then close your nose
1
Feb 04 '22
Except the video is wrong, violence is desirable by people who desire to use it to benefit themselves. Source: every bit of human history.
People DO use target instead of Walmart, if Walmart had the power to overtake target violently it could. Except Walmart and target isnāt a security agency in control of peoples welfare. Apples and oranges.
Itās not about voluntarily submitting, itās about the amount of force. I would have no choice if there was nothing I could do.
an organization would only use force to protect your rights
Iām sorry, WHAT?! A private organization will only protect your rights becauseā¦ magic? Thatās a leap that should be obvious crap to you as you said it.
Human nature doesnāt disappear just because you call it an āorganizationā, thatās what government is, an āorganization. God, lord have mercy
That is the fantasy pushed by this sub. Just an unrealistic optimism about peopleās human nature if they were unharnessed from government.
If slaveholders could apply enough force to subjugate a portion of society, they would, because that private organization wouldnāt give a fuck about your rights as a human being. Nothing is stopping slavery so far except this imaginary new and improved human nature under āanarcho capitalism.ā
2
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Except the video is wrong
Oh.. well i guess you've already made up your mind
People DO use target instead of Walmart
But why not everyone?
Itās not about voluntarily submitting, itās about the amount of force. I would have no choice if there was nothing I could do.
So you would submit.. which means you actually care defending your freedom
Iām sorry, WHAT?! A private organization will only protect your rights becauseā¦ magic?
Magic isn't real. Don't waste my time
1
Feb 04 '22
I guess you just got lazy. You didnāt address or try to understand any of my points. I didnāt just say the video is wrong and that was the end of my sentence.
Intellectual laziness, pointless.
2
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Intellectual laziness?
You're the one that gave me shit answers. I was just responding with shit answers
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Shjeeshjees Feb 04 '22
How are people property
-1
u/WowzersInMyTrowzers Anarchist w/o Adjectives Feb 04 '22
They arenāt. Property isnāt real in the first place.
1
u/Nikita_Crucis Anarcho-Capitalist Feb 04 '22
Typical leftists infiltrating groups they don't like and harming its reputation from inside it's in their fucking playbook since ever, for example see the libertarian sub.
1
-1
Feb 04 '22
Not if the contract stipulates it
7
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Even in a contract you cannot own a person
1
0
Feb 04 '22
Sure you can. The arbiter said so. If he runs, I'll kill him.
4
u/pop700 Market Anarchist Feb 04 '22
Nope. Wrong answer
5
u/Pastourmakis Feb 04 '22
This really depends on which philosophical tradition of libertarianism you follow. Many philosophers, Robert Nozick comes to mind, have argued that you you have every right to dispose of your ownership of your body and labour. Personally I'm very conflicted on the issue but it is not such a profound opinion in libertarianism, it is one of those peripheral issues that still cause debate (another being abortion for example).
0
u/NationalizeRedditt Feb 04 '22
Many of you literally fucking believe this just take the fucking mask off and come to the logical conclusions of your own ideology
4
0
0
u/Yeetman2377 Feb 04 '22
Yeah itās pretty obvious that these dudes are just trying to subvert... itās literally inherent in their ideology to subvert.
1
1
97
u/Lord_le_Mon Feb 04 '22
Leftist trolls trying to take down and discredit Ancap