How Is Propertarianism Not Another Fantasy?

—“So Curt. How is this not a new Rothbardian ideal fantasy? Ie which government specifically are we speaking of taking over, and when we do, how many people do we stack like cordwood for jaywalking?”— Jonathan Page

I can’t respond to all of that in a single comment.But I’ll jump ahead and take a guess your underlying question.

First, natural law prohibits parasitism. Contract law allows for the construction of commons. (that’s what a contract does). The difference between public and private contract law, is that you can prohibit people from consumption and competition, whereas in the market we hope to create consumption and competition.
So we can create commons (like the commons of property rights) that create a good (property rights) by prohibiting consumption of that which one has not obtained through homesteading. transformation, or exchange. We can create parks by allowing passage but not use.(etc). We can create all sorts of commons that one cannot socialize losses against, or privatize. As long as they are not parasitic.

So this prohibits rents but allows investments, including informational rents and investments.

1) Why not a fantasy?
It can be implemented in law – easily I might add, as a set of amendments to the constitution.

2) Which government?
Contractualism.: Rule of natural, common, strictly constructed, judge-discovered law. intergenerational monarchy as veto(judge) of last resort. Market government by voluntary exchange and legal dissent. Market economy by voluntary exchange and legal dissent. Market for reproduction (family) by voluntary exchange and legal dissent. Market for Polities – Rights of association and disassociation.
( Or, as we say ‘markets in everything.)

3) Jaywalking
Well, you know, it turns out that zero tolerance (broken window policing) by individuals and sheriffs is the optimum method of producing prosperity. And we have a lot fewer big ‘bads’ when we eliminate the small bads.

Leave a Reply