tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4945885916072063437.post6778081132985358966..comments2023-10-30T06:46:39.412-07:00Comments on A Fusionist Libertarian: I hate agreeing with ChomskyTerrence C. Watsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07332306056519991646noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4945885916072063437.post-76289087638486255432007-12-08T15:04:00.000-08:002007-12-08T15:04:00.000-08:00Good post. I'm mostly on side with Chomsky on some...Good post. I'm mostly on side with Chomsky on some of these things too (especially ultranationalism).<BR/><BR/>But the property rights story is a bit curious. I agree that, morally, we ought to limit property, especially given its contingent nature (which I will make plain in my dissertation, probably to the lament of some of my committee members). But I worry about the politics.<BR/><BR/>I've come up with what I think is a really clever way to capture something that too many people blow past: the Ought/State gap (maybe you can come up with a cleverer description?). This gap is the gap between a moral justification of some action, x, and the institutionalization of that moral requirement in some particular institution.<BR/><BR/>The government is just one possible vehicle for realizing some moral obligation or requirement. But that vehicle may have certain problems of its own that, in the real world, make it the case that, all-in, it's best not to use it.<BR/><BR/>This is what I believe about property rights. We should be pretty much absolute about property rights, not for moral reasons, or because it is some sort of moral requirement, but because politicians will curtail it for bad reasons (often enough to outweigh the good reasons), or because they will screw things up, as they always do.<BR/><BR/>In the real world, I'm anti eminent domain, and anti takings, but only for practical, not moral, reasons.P. M. Jaworskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06786126111454336767noreply@blogger.com