3 ms·

" Society is free to regulate those "private group affairs" since they are externalizing the costs onto society." Private property, freedom of association is a

• whimsicalism 6y ago
  There's no state of nature where people are engaging in private transactions with legally enforced contracts, creating corporations with limited liability up to the size of the investment, etc. Those are all constructs of society. Your idea that there are these transactions and property 'outside of society' that we have to protect from interference from society does not seem coherent to me, when the existence of a society that does grant private property rights is what allows a Google to exist in the first place.
  • jariel 6y ago
    This is totally upside down. What is 'coherent' is a civil society that is consistent with the application of it's constitution. Of course 'private property' is a construct - but that construct is fundamental, Constitutional. It's like voting. If you take away people's property, your making some very deep transgression of the societal compact, and it's wrong. There are cases where we need to make change - like lowering or increasing the voting age, we have to be careful with that.
• Frondo 6y ago
  It's also a very serious thing to use the resources of society to protect people's private accumulations. If people get to use the force of law to keep their stuff from being stolen, they do have an obligation to pony up for the shared costs of that law enforcement.