Comment: ish

(See in situ)


ish

Unfortunately, any government whose sole purpose is not the protection of liberty, must use coercion and force to implement programs. That being said there is no such thing as socialism. Just tyranny. If they made contracts signing their autonomy away, then theoretically you could use legal enforcement of contracts to keep them in these shackles but they would be indebted to their commune, not obliged to serve it. Could you have a contract that one could sign away his life? Sign away his freedom? Could you do this in a free society? What if he changes his mind?

I dont think the issue is libertarian acceptance, I think the issue is what does the libertarian government do when faced with these questions. If people want to get together and start a corporation where every member is an equal share holder and all property is owned by the corporation and there is a contractually obligated way that decisions are made and hierarchy is organized then members would still be able to own property in their own right. Not the way I understand socialism.

Séamusín