Comments (3)

• Scott Fields

  Excellent. This was one of the fundamental topics I wish had been covered more in Robert Murphy's "Politically Incorrect Guide to Capitalism".

  Capitalism can't be fully understood without completely understanding both the concepts of property and ownership.

  Published: May 21, 2007 1:50 PM

• Jesse

  A very insightful analysis. However, I must disagree on one important point: his position on "retributive justice". In particular, he claims that one ought to recognize a thief as the rightful owner (by "improper" means, but still the owner) of whatever it stole. Talk about punishing the victim!

  Certainly "society" has no obligation to punish the thief; on that we agree. And I am willing to admit that some of the arguments regarding "adverse possession" may have some merit when a great deal of time has passed since the original misdeed. However, that does not imply that the immediate victim of the theft lacks the right to seek the return of the stolen property, merely that others cannot be forced to pay for those efforts. As for the means employed, Kinsella has presented an excellent argument (Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach) for why a thief, or other criminal, cannot rationally argue against proportional retributive punishment.

  Personally I don't see why the author bothered to make a distinction between "proper ownership" and "improper ownership", since both kinds of ownership appear to confer the same benefits. Under his argument, for example, all the territory inside the boundaries of the USA is owned ("improperly") by the government, since they are the ones presently exercising ultimate control over it. He argues against property taxes, but by his own argument they aren't really taxes, but rather rents. The fact that the property was stolen in the first place he apparently deems irrelevant.

  One last thing: the term "anarchist" does not imply "socialist". It's a minor annoyance that the author uses them interchangeably. Ironically, the author appears to be an anarchist himself, though certainly not a socialist.

  Published: May 22, 2007 10:53 AM

• M-la-maudite

  Hi Jesse,

  Yep, the author is a pretty famous an-cap -:)

  and indeed, speak of consistency!

  But he's good, aside the points you mentioned.

  So, guys,
  thanks for posting one more great book online!

  Best, M-
  

  Published: May 23, 2007 12:06 PM