Therefore, you have no right to your own life; you have no right to exist. This makes a terrible sort of sense out what's playing out before your very eyes, doesn't it?
Stopped right there. From this point I knew it was a waste of time to read any further.
“The assumption that a man owns the produce of his labor is the main difference between Europeans and the other people of the world. “
~~~
How is that libertarian???
That’s karl marx!
A man owns the product of his labor insofar as he may negotiate with it and enter into agreements with employers, contractors, creditors, buyers, or barterers for transfer of that product, or he may keep it, but the concept of property as inherent to one’s labor is human nature, whether or not we enter into those agreements. If we are forced under duress to produce things, that is slavery, and ironically, that is also Karl Marx. Ironic because his championed the right of the little guy to the rights to the product of his own labor, but many marxist solutions give that product to the state as a solution.
I think we are in agreement conceptually, but I find the use of the phrase “product of one’s own labor” an interesting one
You’re vote is worth roughly 3/5.
As a individual you officially have some freedoms.
Subject to certain federal restrictions and regulations.
May vary depending which power hungry radical authoritarian is in office at the moment.
Sure does, FRiend.
I would call this ‘ignorant claptrap’, but it’s far from ignorant. It reminds one of the saying that ‘Liberals know a lot, the problem is they know so much that isn’t true’.
If anyone thinks they actually ‘own’ their house, just try not paying property taxes on it.
“The point of the state is to preserve the people and their way of life. This is its primary reason to exist. The secondary and tertiary reasons, like crime control and tending to the poor are all dependent on the people and their way of life.”
Controlling crime is not secondary. Enforcing the agreed upon laws is utterly -primary- to “preserving the people and their way of life”. Without that, or allowing citizens a free hand to, there IS not right to property or commerce.
The perfect example is the BLM riots. The government refuses to stop them, and will brutally arrest and suppress any citizen who protects their property with a rifle.
The situation reminds me of the story of Indians selling Manhattan for a handful of trinkets. To them, it might have seemed like selling the Moon. People are giving away their personal information to Big Tech for far less than it’s worth. That’s what makes Big Tech worth trillions.
I’m not sure that translates into “you don’t own you”, though. Maybe the solution is better awareness of what is being given away, and its value, so the user can make an informed choice.
Quite a few years ago, minnesocold was taking DNA samples from newborns. It was also reported that the govt was trademarking and registering the dna as ownership by the government.
A lawsuit happened and they were told to delete the dna data if requested by the parents, I know quite a few parents that requested that but NEVER got confirmation and were denied information requests on their childrens dna.
After moving out of there we received a call from U of M for participation in studies for their research since our childrens dna profile met the parameters for their study.