|
What about all of the land of the Mexican Cession? I'd say that Mexico was coerced into signing the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo. Would you give up your property if you lived in the Western United States?
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 02:47 |
|
|
absolem posted:
So everything that you own that comes from anyplace in the United States in which the land was taken by force, which is everywhere in the United States, must be returned to their rightful owner because it is stolen property, right? You can very easily track where most of the products you own were created and assembled. Are you going to go through your belongings and return your stolen property or are you going to be implicit in their theft? If you choose to retain your property are you therefore violating the NAP of the original owners of the land and all of its bounty? Does that mean that they have the absolute right to reobtain their property, even through violent means? Would it be moral for me to contact the various representatives of the peoples who originally owned the land and inform them that you have hereby donated all of your property to their ownership? I seriously don't understand.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
absolem posted:Because you can hand your kid the deed to your house, you can't hand them culpability for the 13 small children you murdered. you can't transfer that sort of thing? care to tell me how that would work? besides you could just not take the house Even if you happen not to live on a patch of land not previously owned, which is unlikely, a good deal of the products you own can be tracked back to where they are derived and, by your own philosophy, you are morally culpable for not returning those products. Did you buy fruit this week that was grown from California? You stole it. Send it back to the Mexican government. Is your house made of lumber that came from trees grown on land that was once owned by a native tribe? You stole it. Tear your house down and send the lumber back. Are you posting from a computer with parts made in Texas, assembled in China, and designed by the Japanese? Return it. The land those parts come from, the lands in which they were assembled, and the land in which the ideas leading to their creation were developed on were all stolen. Wait a minute. This doesn't make any sense. It's almost like the logic that led to these ends is ridiculous and unworkable.  Edit: Grammar, I'm dumb Shibby0709 fucked around with this message at 01:12 on May 23, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 01:03
|
|
|
absolem posted:
Furthermore, rational thought is something that is only used for extremely limited functions by people. The vast majority of our decision making is done through heuristics, not rationality.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:
Respect for the NAP, duh. If they took over a town and enslaved its inhabitants then people would refuse to trade with them, allowing the free market to prevail. It would be a lose-lose for all. That's why we don't see violence in either history or nature.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 02:47 |
|
|
absolem posted:I can't keep up with this at all anymore (especially since this was a queer day off from work). So, I'll leave it at this: very little got done here. I'm still not convinced that ancap-ism is wrong, but if you want to throw some other positions at me to look at, I promise to give them a fair shake and report back (if the thread is still around). I just want everyone to know that its not that I refuse to consider change, but that I'd like to be careful about it.It would be nice to find a better system, I just don't know if it exists (so point me towards one if you like). Read Rawls. Many of the people in this forum and many academics agree with the system of ethics he lays out. It's not a priori, and makes no claim to be, but at least the applications of it seem to make basic sense. Edit: Familiarizing yourself with Marx is obviously important. A little reading into behavioural economics will show how ridiculous even the axioms of an-cap philosophy is. I recommend "Thinking Fast and Slow" by Daniel Kahneman since it is new and designed as an introduction for laymen. Ha-Joon Chang is a heterodox economist and he writes very good, short books on some of the mistakes of neoclassical economics. Further Edit: I like Joseph Stiglitz, too. His work investigating information asymmetry is pretty pivotal, and he also writes books for laymen. Shibby0709 fucked around with this message at 03:34 on May 23, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 23, 2014 03:29
|
|