The Daily Paul has been archived. Please see the continuation of the Daily Paul at Popular

Thank you for a great ride, and for 8 years of support!

Comment: You need to read up on the

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: You're mistaken. In the (see in situ)

You need to read up on the

You need to read up on the dark and middle ages. You have a lot of misconceptions.

You really need to understand what states are. States are just the marauders that moved in. Warlords need something to steal. No funding, no warlords. There has to be enough capital that there is a 'profit' to be made by subjugating a people.

Marauding works ok, but it is self limiting. Even if you don't kill everyone you have to leave enough for them to rebuild. If you leave too much they might be able to defend themselves. All in all it's risky.

However once the prey has enough capital that there is enough surplus to make it more profitable for the predators to oppress than do productive enterprise, then the predators can move in permanently.

States. Kings. Lords.

So no, no lords had original property rights. Free people did and must always pre-exist the state, and those people had claim. Certainly when the predators moved in they made a claim. But the claim is invalid.

And you can stop with the imputing of Walter's trope to absolute property rights on me. I already told you I don't agree with that. Walter believes in rights as a priori things. I see rights as resultant from our nature which is always evolving.

We can logically define their parameters but we haven't the capacity to understand them completely because they are changing continually. That doesn't mean we should not try to come as close as we can, and we a simple understanding of natural rights gets us well over 90% of the way there.