3 ms·
They have the option of using state coercion should someone contest their ownership, but they're not using it right now. Even with that pedantry aside, saying t
by simulate-me 5y ago
They have the option of using state coercion should someone contest their ownership, but they're not using it right now. Even with that pedantry aside, saying that property rights leverage "state coercion" is not a good take.
- ada1981 5y agoThat is what property rights are though. It’s a promise from the violence monopoly to keep people off your land.
- simulate-me 5y agoI don't think the government has a monopoly on violence in many places in Central America.
- ada1981 5y agoHow are the property rights there? The strength of a government, and thus, the property rights it “grants” people, is the degree to which it has been successful in establishing a violence monopoly.
- eesmith 5y agoNo, it isn't. People in countries like Finland have a 'freedom to roam', showing that property rights don't need to include the right to control who can enter a piece of land. This dates from a time when people recognized property ownership, but there was no government monopoly on violence. (See especially the Icelandic Commonwealth and the Icelandic sagas.)