What is the Austrian School's position on land rights with respect to the Native American peoples?
sicsempertyrannis: nirgrahamUK: what do you think Block says in the talk ? Ok to clarify he has written several pieces about reparations/land reform. Those are what I was referring to as silly. I didnt listen to the talk because I dont have to; I already know what his position is. Basically, since my great-great-great-great grandfather owned about 25 slaves - fast forward to today - me, who has never owned a slave, now owes them money. I dont think so.
nirgrahamUK: what do you think Block says in the talk ?
what do you think Block says in the talk ?
Ok to clarify he has written several pieces about reparations/land reform. Those are what I was referring to as silly. I didnt listen to the talk because I dont have to; I already know what his position is. Basically, since my great-great-great-great grandfather owned about 25 slaves - fast forward to today - me, who has never owned a slave, now owes them money. I dont think so.
This isn't his contention at all. Think about it after your hissy fit.
Democracy means the opportunity to be everyone's slave.—Karl Kraus.
E. R. Olovetto: sicsempertyrannis: nirgrahamUK: what do you think Block says in the talk ? Ok to clarify he has written several pieces about reparations/land reform. Those are what I was referring to as silly. I didnt listen to the talk because I dont have to; I already know what his position is. Basically, since my great-great-great-great grandfather owned about 25 slaves - fast forward to today - me, who has never owned a slave, now owes them money. I dont think so. This isn't his contention at all. Think about it after your hissy fit.
Dont know, because I didnt listen to that talk. But hes written on the topic on more than one occasion, and that is an accurate example of his line of thinking.
sicsempertyrannis: Conza88: Reparations by Walter Block One of his most laughable positions. I lost alot of respect for his theories after reading that one.
Conza88: Reparations by Walter Block
Reparations by Walter Block
One of his most laughable positions. I lost alot of respect for his theories after reading that one.
sicsempertyrannis: We can presume that Block probably approves of Mugabe's land reform.
Because?
I don't see how strong adherance to the non-aggression principle would lead to supporting anything Mugabe has done.
sicsempertyrannis:But to get to the point of the thread, most libertarians will probably say you shouldnt 'steal their land'. But this argument reminds me of immigration restriction/border security advocates. Was the whole of the New World 'their' land? Had they 'homesteaded' the whole lot of every part of it? (nevermind they had no concept of private property) No, in fact they had homesteaded very little of it - but this wont stop some libertarians from telling you that whitey needs to move back to the old world to satisfy the ridiculous Blockian notion of 'justice'.
Colonial European-Americans did a lot of horrible things. I've never so much as thought about enslaving or displacing anyone. Reparations could be made if you have some actual evidence of ownership by a descendant of the displaced. Native American Indians did not use the land in a way consistent with "homesteading all of it". The bolded is tripe, and I have no clue what you mean by it.
sicsempertyrannis:Dont know, because I didnt listen to that talk. But hes written on the topic on more than one occasion, and that is an accurate example of his line of thinking.
Why don't you try to know what you are talking about before you make yourself look more stupid, comrade. What you claim to be accurate is patently inaccurate as anyone would see from a quick look at the actual writing.
sicsempertyrannis: Conza88: Reparations by Walter Block One of his most laughable positions. I lost alot of respect for his theories after reading that one. We can presume that Block probably approves of Mugabe's land reform.
One of his most laughable positions. I lost alot of respect for his theories after reading that one. We can presume that Block probably approves of Mugabe's land reform.
Nice to see that you are able to "read" and audio file. Anyway, I suggest you listen to audio file.
This isn't Block's position.
sicsempertyrannis: nirgrahamUK: what do you think Block says in the talk ? Ok to clarify he has written several pieces about reparations/land reform. Those are what I was referring to as silly. I didnt listen to the talk because I dont have to; I already know what his position is. Basically, since my great-great-great-great grandfather owned about 25 slaves - fast forward to today - me, who has never owned a slave, now owes their descendants (who were never slaves themselves) money. I dont think so.
Ok to clarify he has written several pieces about reparations/land reform. Those are what I was referring to as silly. I didnt listen to the talk because I dont have to; I already know what his position is. Basically, since my great-great-great-great grandfather owned about 25 slaves - fast forward to today - me, who has never owned a slave, now owes their descendants (who were never slaves themselves) money. I dont think so.
To paraphrase Marc Faber: We're all doomed, but that doesn't mean that we can't make money in the process. Rabbi Lapin: "Let's make bricks!" Stephan Kinsella: "Say you and I both want to make a German chocolate cake."
Daniel: That's not Block's position. You would only owe reparations if you lived on land that the slaves worked on. I suggest you listen to the audio file, so that you do not come off as ignorant.
I already clarified that I have already read several of his other pieces of the same topic (yes, yes I should have said so in the original reply). Unless he has modified his positions since then (no clue when he wrote the older ones) I see no need to listen to it.
none of us Blockheads can possibly concede the point until you quote us wrong.
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
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."
Byzantine:Reparations to descendants of slaves is equivalent to suing a tortfeasor's grandson for the better position you'd be in if the original tortfeasor hadn't negligently killed your grandfather.
no its different.
the latter tries to attach a value to future earnings teh grandfather never got to earn and pass onto his kids.
the former says that actual earning the grandfather was owed when he died is indeed owed to the grandfather and if there is evidence that the grandfather willed it (his possessions) to his descendants (and not third parties, like friends or charities) then there is a definite case for transferring the stolen property to its rightful owners.
Byzantine: Daniel:You would only owe reparations if you lived on land that the slaves worked on. That doesn't make sense either. Any net value the slaves added to the land has already been purchased fair and square. Slaveowners owe their slaves damages for false imprisonment. If you never were a slave, you aren't owed anything. Reparations to descendants of slaves is equivalent to suing a tortfeasor's grandson for the better position you'd be in if the original tortfeasor hadn't negligently killed your grandfather.
Daniel:You would only owe reparations if you lived on land that the slaves worked on.
That doesn't make sense either. Any net value the slaves added to the land has already been purchased fair and square. Slaveowners owe their slaves damages for false imprisonment. If you never were a slave, you aren't owed anything.
Reparations to descendants of slaves is equivalent to suing a tortfeasor's grandson for the better position you'd be in if the original tortfeasor hadn't negligently killed your grandfather.
How so? The slaves would have title to the plantation, but since they are dead, the title goes to their descendants. Thus, the descendant of the slaveowner would not have title to the plantation, and would have relinquish control to the descendants of the slaves.
Daniel: How so? The slaves would have title to the plantation, but since they are dead, the title goes to their descendants. Thus, the descendant of the slaveowner would not have title to the plantation, and would have relinquish control to the descendants of the slaves.
So because Uncle Ben worked the cotton fields, his descendants get the cotton fields and the house? Why?
There are too many variables for it to ever work, even if it were desirable. After 1865, my family allowed several older ex-slaves to live out their golden years on the plantation. Does the free room and board count as reparations of sorts?
sicsempertyrannis: Daniel: How so? The slaves would have title to the plantation, but since they are dead, the title goes to their descendants. Thus, the descendant of the slaveowner would not have title to the plantation, and would have relinquish control to the descendants of the slaves. So because Uncle Ben worked the cotton fields, his descendants get the cotton fields and the house? Why?
Can you answer my questions or are you going to just keep spewing garbage?
E. R. Olovetto: Can you answer my questions or are you going to just keep spewing garbage?
Actually I am going to ignore you from now on. I will dig up a source for Uknig later, but I dont care what you have to say at all.
good game you lose