Tag: artificial property rights
What’s Stossel Supposed to be Defending, Again?
I coined the term “vulgar libertarianism” several years back to describe reflexive mainstream libertarian defenses of the existing corporate capitalist system as if it were the free market, and using “free market” principles to justify the evils of the corporate economy. I recently saw one of the worst examples of this phenomenon ever, courtesy of…
Libertarians in Agreement?
In “Private Property, When and Why,” Joseph writes, “At best, private property is a neutral concept in itself; based on given natural conditions, it can be either good or bad.” While I disagreed with this position initially, I believe after further clarification, I am actually in full agreement with it. To determine if the concept…
Private Property, When and Why
Mutual Exchange is the Center’s goal in two senses — we favor a society rooted in peaceful, voluntary cooperation, and we seek to foster understanding through ongoing dialogue. Mutual Exchange will provide opportunities for conversation about issues that matter to the Center’s audience. A lead essay, deliberately provocative, will be followed by responses from inside and…
Private Property, A Pretty Good Option
Mutual Exchange is the Center’s goal in two senses — we favor a society rooted in peaceful, voluntary cooperation, and we seek to foster understanding through ongoing dialogue. Mutual Exchange will provide opportunities for conversation about issues that matter to the Center’s audience. A lead essay, deliberately provocative, will be followed by responses from inside…
Private Property, the Least Bad Option
Libertarians tend to see two worlds: one with private property that works reasonably well, and one without that farcically implodes. What they often miss, however, is that this dichotomy is conditional. Private property isn’t morally meritorious or great in itself, but only insofar as it is the best and only way to avoid conflict given…
Support C4SS with Kevin Carson’s “‘Privatization’ or Privateering?”
C4SS has teamed up with the Distro of the Libertarian Left. The Distro produces and distribute zines and booklets on anarchism, market anarchist theory, counter-economics, and other movements for liberation. For every copy of Kevin Carson’s “‘Privatization’ or Privateering?” that you purchase through the Distro, C4SS will receive a percentage. Support C4SS with Kevin Carson’s “‘Privatization’ or Privateering?” $1.00 for the first copy….
Music Piracy As Market Correction
AUTHOR’S NOTE: TechCrunch has reported that the Iron Maiden story that this article was centered around was misreported, if not an outright fabrication. We have corrected the factual inaccuracies and regret the error. For years, advocates of strict enforcement of intellectual property law on the Internet and elsewhere have said that the single largest detriment…
Four Questions for Amia Srinivasan
Amia Srinivasan has four questions for free-market moralists, specifically those who accept something like a Nozickian account of individual rights. My own take is more Rothbardian than Nozickian, but that still seems close enough to give her four answers, and to ask four questions in return about the assumptions that underlie her essay. Amia begins by asking: 1….
“Propriedade Intelectual”: Esta Terra foi Feita para Você e … para a Monsanto
Esse não é um caso de patente “errada” ou “excessivamente ampla” ou “impropriamente aplicada.” Por sua própria natureza, a “propriedade intelectual” sempre envolve uma pessoa afirmar ter título de propriedade das mentes, corpos e posses de outras pessoas.
Support C4SS with ALL Distro’s “No Copyright”
For every copy of ALL Distro’s “No Copyright” that you purchase through the Distro, C4SS will receive a percentage.
Support C4SS with ALL Distro’s “The Question of Copyright”
For every copy of ALL Distro’s “The Question of Copyright” that you purchase through the Distro, C4SS will receive a percentage.
“Intellectual Property”: This Land was Made for You an … er, for Monsanto
Knapp: By its very nature, “intellectual property” always represents an assertion on the part of one person of ownership title to the minds, bodies and property of others.
The “Death of Private Property”?
David S. D’Amato: As an individualist anarchist, however, I define it as something rather different, as nothing more than one of the ways we ensure the law of equal liberty in practice.
Da Completa Falta de Sentido da Morte de Aaron Swartz
Assim, as pessoas que acossaram Aaron Swartz levando-o à morte fizeram isso nem sequer na esperança realista de vitória em sua rota de retirada, a infligir mais uma humilhação ao país violado.
Sobre la Profunda Insensatez de la Muerte de Aaron Swartz
Carson: La gente que acosó a Aaron Swartz hasta su muerte lo hizo no con una esperanza realista de victoria, si no debido al mismo impulso vengativo que lleva a un invasor derrotado a infligir una indignidad más al país violado en su retirada.
On the Utter Senselessness of Aaron Swartz’s Death
Carson: The people who hounded Aaron Swartz to his death did so, not even in the realistic hope of victory, but out of the same vindictive impulse that drives a defeated invader to inflict one more indignity on the violated country on its way out.
Natural and Artificial Capital Contrasted (With Apologies to Thomas Hodgskin)
Carson: To the lords of artificial scarcity, who derive their income from impeding producers’ ability to produce, natural abundance is a danger.
Anarchy and Democracy
Fighting Fascism
Markets Not Capitalism
The Anatomy of Escape
Organization Theory