[ExI] Public spaces

Dan dan_ust at yahoo.com
Mon Apr 13 18:08:36 UTC 2009

--- On Mon, 4/13/09, painlord2k at libero.it <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
> Il 13/04/2009 17.37, Dan ha scritto:
> > Actually, these are based on fantasies too.  No
> government existing
> > today was formed in that way.  The use of "public
> spaces" and "public
> > property" merely hides this fact and tries to conceal
> that the
> > government controls -- in a sense "owns" -- such
> spaces and
> > properties and as it sees fit.
> You are right. All the governments properties are unjustly
> owned and controlled. And given that the chain of ownership
> is usually unknown, there is no way to give back to the real
> owners or their heirs.
> The Gordian Know was solved in a simple way, as it was
> insoluble in other ways more palatable.
> I'm not claiming that this solution is without problems.
> But in a fully libertarians society all available land
> would be property of someone after enough time and then
> agreements would need to follows on how use a part of the
> land to let people and goods to move.

Not so.  Some land could remain unowned in a libertarian society.  In fact, under libertarianism, aside from self-owned beings, there would be just privately owned property and unowned things.  The latter could be homesteaded (or appropriated) becoming privately owned; the former could be abandoned becoming unowned.

As for what do with current government owned land, leaving it in the governments' hands is NOT a libertarian solution.  That's merely statism and I submit that anyone who proposing keeping it govenrment hands is not really a libertarian or, to be charitable, not consistently libertarian (on this issue).  As you might agree, where possible, it must be returned to its rightful owners.  Where that is NOT possible, it still must be removed from government ownership and control -- even if it's only put back into a state of non-ownership and ready to be homesteaded.  (Another possibility is putting the property into ownership of the taxpayers (and other known victims) of the governments in questions in propertion to the level of taxes (or privations) suffered.)
> Then we have the problem of how decide how much the
> property extend up in the air and low in the earth or over
> the water.
> There is any good solution to how return the land owned by
> the government to the people?
> Because I can see the government disown the land a day. And
> a bunch of people fight to homestead it one hour after, all
> with their feet ready to step in the land and reclaim it for
> them as the government step out.
> I think there is no solution bound to make all happy or
> simply right for all and able to redress all torts. Only
> "good enough" solutions.

This does not follow.  This is like saying there is slavery and since there's no simply solution to the problem of slavery, we must keep the slave system intact and merely make it as efficient as possible.

No doubt, were a libertarian society to come about in an existing society -- as opposed to, say, starting a libertarian settlement from scratch off world -- it'd be gradually.  But that gradualism would be one of removing government from each area of encroachment -- not one of pretending that existing government property can be used by supposed libertarians to pretend that it's okay to play xenophobe with it.




More information about the extropy-chat mailing list