3 ms·
You could say the same thing about any form of property.
by monochromatic 8y ago
You could say the same thing about any form of property.
- mdpopescu 8y agoNo, only about Imaginary Property.
- monochromatic 8y agoNo, it is literally true that the threat of state violence is what props up the ability to own any property.
- mdpopescu 8y agoThis is so obviously wrong I have no idea how to continue.
- monochromatic 8y agoWhat stops other people from taking your tangible property other than the threat of state action? Sure, there are plenty of people who would refrain from stealing anyway just because it’s morally wrong. But there are enough people who don’t care that the whole idea of property rights becomes meaningless in practice without some way of enforcing them.
- nybble41 8y ago> What stops other people from taking your tangible property other than the threat of state action? Aside from morals, the threat of reciprocation, not by the state specifically but by the property owner who was harmed and anyone authorized to act on their behalf. Unlike actual property, IP isn't based on reciprocation. The penalties for infringement go way beyond simply losing similar forms of IP.
- monochromatic 8y agoThe penalty for stealing my TV might well include a bullet in the chest. I’m not sure what your point is.
- nybble41 8y agoThat would simply be murder, not a just or reasonable response to someone stealing your TV. In any case it still doesn't involve any state action, so we appear to be in violent agreement that, contrary to your original assertion, the state is not the only thing stopping other people from taking your property.