So then you still want your laptop to be your laptop but you prefer a different framework of defining what that means in principle and in practice than the conventional, mostly western developed-world legal frameworks that currently dominate. Is that accurate?
Although I don't really like this term very much (because I think jargon in general seems to obscure what it's trying to disclose), I find myself mostly agreeing with what libertarians call "natural law" most of the time that they use it, and I feel like property - possessions - mostly have a pretty obvious "natural law" set of rights and wrongs around them that my dogs seem to understand perfectly well without any codification.
When there is contention between my dogs over some property, most often the assertion of natural law will carry and often the less dominant dog will prevail when she has natural law on her side. But there are also occasions when the provenance of some goody is not clear and in that case, might makes right in the dog world and the spoils then invariably go to the stronger, more dominant dog.
For all its warts, the capitalist codification of law surrounding property mostly aligns pretty well with my notion of natural law around property and mostly (*mostly*) protects humans from might makes right losses. Under your interpretation of libertarian socialism, how would property contentions be managed?
pjv
npub1pjv…0h42
2024-01-02 13:13:13
in reply to nevent1q…hje9
Author Public Key
npub1pjvcwasj9ydasx9nmkf09pftsg640vm5fs7tzprssew8544yj2ds6e0h42Published at
2024-01-02 13:13:13Event JSON
{
"id": "1252ffddc9da2d4f22159ffec10acb4403e69d6f49911601e122a1753f998db9",
"pubkey": "0c99877612291bd818b3dd92f2852b823557b3744c3cb10470865c7a56a4929b",
"created_at": 1704197593,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"p",
"76c71aae3a491f1d9eec47cba17e229cda4113a0bbb6e6ae1776d7643e29cafa"
],
[
"e",
"a6630df7f6309b184a015cb17b0eeebd25dbffc64b6417ff633a55af7653dc44",
"wss://nos.lol/",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"93df59e6640b7ceb93bead515f7c6aff1265352c77233b0e5582edd42ce9b247",
"wss://relay.nostr.band/trusted",
"reply"
]
],
"content": "So then you still want your laptop to be your laptop but you prefer a different framework of defining what that means in principle and in practice than the conventional, mostly western developed-world legal frameworks that currently dominate. Is that accurate?\n\nAlthough I don't really like this term very much (because I think jargon in general seems to obscure what it's trying to disclose), I find myself mostly agreeing with what libertarians call \"natural law\" most of the time that they use it, and I feel like property - possessions - mostly have a pretty obvious \"natural law\" set of rights and wrongs around them that my dogs seem to understand perfectly well without any codification.\n\nWhen there is contention between my dogs over some property, most often the assertion of natural law will carry and often the less dominant dog will prevail when she has natural law on her side. But there are also occasions when the provenance of some goody is not clear and in that case, might makes right in the dog world and the spoils then invariably go to the stronger, more dominant dog.\n\nFor all its warts, the capitalist codification of law surrounding property mostly aligns pretty well with my notion of natural law around property and mostly (*mostly*) protects humans from might makes right losses. Under your interpretation of libertarian socialism, how would property contentions be managed?",
"sig": "fa82db14280a0ab89d16db54c3584950c58199ba851f14f7bff1f3770678420a2bb35fbe3c04cddaa9a44195d385d45841bd9ef5aa160d95442670786c9051cf"
}