iDad's Profile

Name:
iDad
Joined:
Oct 7, 2012

Recent Comments

iDad

Salvatore Padula

iDad

Salvatore Padula

Western Chauvinist 

That said, I'll explain to you how I arrive at the conclusion principle of respect for private property being codified into law:

I start with the premise that the only role of the state is to protect natural rights (this is the essence of libertarianism). In the state of nature a person is entitled to bodily integrity, free from external coercion. (You might quibble with this, but it seems to me to be fairly self-evident and is accepted by conservatives as being part of the natural law.) This right to bodily integrity extends to the right to one's own labor. Property is the result of one's labor being applied to natural resources (which in a state of nature are unowned until labor is applied to them). Thus, propety is a natural right and should be protected by the law. Q.E.D. · May 16, 2013 at 7:07pm

I appreciate the response, which confirms that you believe that the principles or ideals to which you subscribe should be codified into law.  In this respect you are no different from those having different principles.

Edited on May 17, 2013 at 7:44pm
iDad

Salvatore Padula

Western Chauvinist: Here's a proposal. Give me an ideal a libertarian believes is worth codifying into law. · 14 minutes ago

Respect for property rights is another. · 16 hours ago

You wrote earlier "Libertarians are not opposed to standards, ideals, or customary practices. We just don't find them to be legitimate motivations for law in and of themselves."  Now you identify "respect for property rights" as an "ideal" worth codifying  into law.  Please explain.

iDad

Salvatore Padula

iDad

Salvatore Padula

 

I define any use of coercive force beyond that necessary for the defense of individuals or their property as tyranny. I would agree that it's easy to label others tyrants, but I think that's because so many are in fact tyrants. As to the pettiness argument, petty tyrannies result from petty tyrants.

Instead of tyranny, would you prefer I say "illigitimate use of coercive force?" · 13 hours ago

Edited 13 hours ago

Of course, some people regard the use of coercive force to protect property as illegitimate and tyrannical. 

If Chesterton's comment read, "The liberty to make laws protecting individuals and property is what constitutes a free people," would you agree with it?

Edited on May 15, 2013 at 7:24pm
iDad

Salvatore Padula

kylez:Conservatives, like progressives, are willing to accept tyranny in the cause of social cohesion. Libertarians are not.

what does this mean? conservatives are willing to accept tyranny? if they accept something in the cause of social cohesion then they therefore do not see that as tyranny.  · 11 minutes ago

They might not see it as tyranny, but it doesn't mean they're right. Tyrants are big on social cohesion. · 4 hours ago

When one defines "tyranny" as any limitation on the exercise of individual preference, no matter how petty, it's easy to label others tyrants.

iDad

Too busy worrying about legalizing pot, I guess.

iDad

Fred Cole

 

I hardly count Santorum as a human...

Classy as usual.

iDad

Planned Parenthood has done exactly what Gosnell was convicted of doing, or its employees are more skilled than Gosnell at killing babies just before the babies' heads emerge, or both.

iDad

Professor Yoo - Does "I deplore the Obama administration's assault on freedom of the press" mean that you believe the Obama Administration's action with respect to AP is illegal or unconstitutional?  Or is your point only that the media and Democrats are hypocrites?

iDad

And so many people consider themselves well informed because they read the garbage that is the NYT.

iDad
Salvatore Padula: I think if you look at his record objectively there's no way that Christie is with Cuomo 98% of the time, regardless of what Christie is claimed to have told some blogger. · 2 hours ago

If you look at his record objectively, he's no conservative.  

iDad

Salvatore Padula

iDad

Salvatore Padula

 

Chris Christie is to the right of the median American voter. You and I  might not like certain of his positions, but I don't think it's possible to seriously argue with that.

If you define Republicanism so narrowly that you're willing to concede that the Democratic Party ideologically represents a clear majority of Americans that's fine, but it isn't a strategy that the Republican Party should embrace. · May 10, 2013 at 10:16pm

I guess Andrew Cuomo is the right of the median American voter too, since Christie agrees with him 98% of the time. 

Becoming Democrat lite isn't a good strategy for the GOP .  More important, it isn't what the US needs.

 

iDad

Salvatore Padula

iDad: In all but the bluest of states, he would be a Democrat. 

If that's true it's an indictment of the Republican Party.  · 1 hour ago

No -it's an indictment of Christie and New Jersey.

iDad

In all but the bluest of states, he would be a Democrat. 

No sale.

iDad

I guess Fred doesn't want to answer whether, in his "free market" model, individuals would be allowed to band together and limit their liability through incorporation. 

 

iDad

"Well, if they had a business structure that gave them limited liability, it would expose the flaws in that kind of structure which privatizes the benefits but socializes the costs."

Does your free market philosophy include opposition to limiting risk through incorporation?

iDad

James of England - very nice job exposing Zafar.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In