Downin00 Posted December 25, 2014 Posted December 25, 2014 Hi, I've been discussing a free society to some of my roommates. The crux of the dispute now is that whether the state technically owns the land. Because if this cannot be proved, then the Love it or Leave argument stands. The owner of a land sets the rules, so technically this owner says if you don't like it then leave (you'll be charged a fee to leave as well). The best argument, for me, to say the state is not the owner is - the state is the possessor of the land, but not a legitimate owner because no government has acquired land without force or threats. How would I prove this? What are some specific resources on the beginning history of statism?
Magnus Posted December 26, 2014 Posted December 26, 2014 Hi, I've been discussing a free society to some of my roommates. The crux of the dispute now is that whether the state technically owns the land. Because if this cannot be proved, then the Love it or Leave argument stands. The owner of a land sets the rules, so technically this owner says if you don't like it then leave (you'll be charged a fee to leave as well). The best argument, for me, to say the state is not the owner is - the state is the possessor of the land, but not a legitimate owner because no government has acquired land without force or threats. How would I prove this? What are some specific resources on the beginning history of statism? How can a state legitimately form in the first place, such that it can, as a corporate entity, own land, much less own land that it did not acquire through the ordinary chain of title?
powder Posted December 26, 2014 Posted December 26, 2014 Downin already asked this question in another thread, he/she either didn't like, or did not understand the answers.
Recommended Posts