What is the libertarian solution to Tamil protesters scrambling onto the Gardiner Expressway and blocking traffic? Who should have exclusive right over the road, the protestors or the drivers?
The whole point of a protest is that it has to be a credible threat of aggression. It's not a question of ownership.
The fallacies of intellectual communism, a compilation - On the nature of power
February 17 - 1600 - Giordano Bruno is burnt alive by the catholic church. Aquinas : "much more reason is there for heretics, as soon as they are convicted of heresy, to be not only excommunicated but even put to death."
did they haz permit? if not then tits or GTFO
do we get free cheezeburger in socielism?
please tell me what the protesters were hoping for the canadian goverment to do?
Where there is no property there is no justice; a proposition as certain as any demonstration in Euclid
Fools! not to see that what they madly desire would be a calamity to them as no hands but their own could bring
Juan:What is the libertarian solution to Tamil protesters scrambling onto the Gardiner Expressway and blocking traffic? Who should have exclusive right over the road, the protestors or the drivers? I do side with the drivers. If the protesters are unhappy about the government they should go lynching some (or all) politicians. Of course, it seems that in order to get attention it's easier to upset the daily lives of people who you've never met... The legal side of it is, I think : the protesters have no right to block the road. If they 'own' it, so do the drivers. And roads are meant to be used as...roads...not playgrounds.
What would be your response to the left-libertarian claim that public property was analogous to unowned property, that anyone can homestead legitimately? After all, since the government is just a gang of theives it would be more just to remove it from their possession than to let them continue to use it.
Stephen Forde:What would be your response to the left-libertarian claim that public property was analogous to unowned property, that anyone can homestead legitimately?
That is based on a misunderstanding, and I suspect in some circles, a deliberate lie.
Pubic property is stolen property, not unowned property.
nirgrahamUK:please tell me what the protesters were hoping for the canadian goverment to do?
From another article I read (don't remember where), they want the Can-Fed-Gov to press sanctions against Sri Lanka. I'm sure they 'ld also like some humanitarian aid. Probably would like a peacekeeping force too.
After all, since the government is just a gang of theives it would be more just to remove it from their possession than to let them continue to use it.
Stephen Forde: What is the libertarian solution to Tamil protesters scrambling onto the Gardiner Expressway and blocking traffic? Who should have exclusive right over the road, the protestors or the drivers?
Whoever has the power to enforce their claim.
"Anticapitalist theories share in common an inability to take human nature as it is. Rather than analyzing man as a complex creature, anticapitalist theories tend to focus on what the theorist wishes man to be." - Isaac Morehouse
I would say the protesters. They want their voice to be heard.
Freiheit: Stephen Forde: What is the libertarian solution to Tamil protesters scrambling onto the Gardiner Expressway and blocking traffic? Who should have exclusive right over the road, the protestors or the drivers? Whoever has the power to enforce their claim.
So, if riot police rushed them and beat them, they would have the power to enforce their claim and you would have no objection?
Rugrat:I would say the protesters. They want their voice to be heard.
So, if someone wants to be heard, they should be allowed to obstruct whoever they want?
What happens if one of the protesters shows up in a car, or a driver chooses to protest?
What if a protestor gets in a car and wants to drive home?
Stephen Forde: Freiheit: Stephen Forde: What is the libertarian solution to Tamil protesters scrambling onto the Gardiner Expressway and blocking traffic? Who should have exclusive right over the road, the protestors or the drivers? Whoever has the power to enforce their claim. So, if riot police rushed them and beat them, they would have the power to enforce their claim and you would have no objection?
I never said I personally wouldn't have an objection.
I'm just saying, from the standpoint of "who ought to be allowed control over the road?," there's really no answer, other than whoever has the power to enforce their claim.
Freiheit: Stephen Forde: Freiheit: Stephen Forde: What is the libertarian solution to Tamil protesters scrambling onto the Gardiner Expressway and blocking traffic? Who should have exclusive right over the road, the protestors or the drivers? Whoever has the power to enforce their claim. So, if riot police rushed them and beat them, they would have the power to enforce their claim and you would have no objection? I never said I personally wouldn't have an objection. I'm just saying, from the standpoint of "who ought to be allowed control over the road?," there's really no answer, other than whoever has the power to enforce their claim.
Ok, I see. Amoralism.
fezwhatley: did they haz permit? if not then tits or GTFO
Whereas I do not support disrupting traffic in protests any more than damaging private property, I would prefer in general to see people NOT begging the government for permission to assemble. Laws requiring permits are the death of a thousand cuts to liberty, and ought to be broken all the time.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!