Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Another Justice/PDA Question

rated by 0 users
This post has 6 Replies | 2 Followers

Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 663
Points 10,885
Moderator
Thedesolateone Posted: Fri, Jan 23 2009 7:05 AM

Scenario:

I own half of a river, and my section is downriver. Since I homesteaded my half of the river, another individual homesteaded upriver, and after a while began polluting. Obviously, I now "file a suit" against him; he has violated my property rights. However, he will not accept any ruling that an arbiter makes, and is armed to the teeth. He has a strong PDA, and while I also have a PDA I don't wish to cause a massive war.

1. How do enforce any judgement on this man?; while I would be justified in self-defence as he has initiated aggression, it seems that I would lose any battle.

2. Would our PDAs go to war? Would they do nothing?

Basically I need help on this situation; I am debating with a roughly minarchist friend. Thanks

The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.

  • | Post Points: 65
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Fri, Jan 23 2009 1:56 PM

You you have to switch PDAs and find somebody who will fight for your interests.

You have a few disadvantages against the man (obviously) because he is on his own property.  You can try to invade his property, but you would be quickly repelled by force (and probably charged in court for armed trespassing).

So should instead try starvation warfare.  Your PDA should file complaints against him in court to get his water, electricity, telephone, and mail service cut off.  He should be banished from using the roads, and pretty much imprisoned on his own property.  Pretty soon he will discover that being armed to the teeth will not get him what he wants.

On the other hand, you could just shoot him, but only if he shoots you first.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 100 Contributor
Male
Posts 985
Points 17,110
Stephen replied on Fri, Jan 23 2009 4:07 PM

What, exactly, would be the terms and conditions of your agreement with your security agency?

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Not Ranked
Posts 62
Points 1,770
liege replied on Fri, Jan 23 2009 4:29 PM

I'm assuming that PDA stands for 'Private Defense Agency'?

Anyway, you may not have to worry about your polluting neighbor's PDA unilaterally supporting anything he does. A strong business firm in a state-less market will more than likely derive much of its business from its fairness, especially one concerned with justice. Once the wider community realized that one of their PDA's is willing to back someone so anti-social, they'd be likely to boycott that company, forcing them to make a decision to hold their ground and lose clients, or succumb to the public will and tell your polluter neighbor that if he continues on his course, he's on his own.

Although his PDA abandoning him and other PDA's refusing to insure him won't directly stop his pollution, I think you'll find that a general community boycott would work wonders. If that doesn't work, I suppose you'll just have to live without a pristine river. Failing that, arm wrestle him after working out like a maniac.

I don't think we need be worried about private wars in the future, however. People are loathe to engage in such wastefulness when they have to pay for it out of their pockets.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 663
Points 10,885
Moderator

Thanks for the answers.

Surely there would exist PDAs willing to exploit the market that is blatantly immoral people - think about it - they are a large portion of the population?

Moreover, are we to allow that I may not be able to get restitution, even though he has violated a property right?

Thirdly, are we presuming the existence of one accepted courts system?; Surely he might merely claim he isn't doing anything wrong by the rules of the justice system he adheres to?

The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 659
Points 13,990
ama gi replied on Fri, Jan 23 2009 6:51 PM

Thedesolateone:
Surely there would exist PDAs willing to exploit the market that is blatantly immoral people - think about it - they are a large portion of the population?

The idea is that blatantly immoral PDAs and courts would be boycotted and resisted at every turn.

Sure, narcissistic people could try to form their own private law, but

1) no normal people would do business with them.  If they want loans, jobs, and care in a life-threatening emergency, they're our of luck.

2) they probably could not cooperate amongst themselves for very long.  Look  at the pact between Hitler and Stalin--didn't lastlong.

"As long as there are sovereign nations possessing great power, war is inevitable."

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Fri, Jan 23 2009 7:47 PM

Your protector would have to reimburse you for the damage caused to your property. The choice to fight it out would then be strictly his own.

  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (7 items) | RSS