Hello, there, Steve. I'm not a terrific traveler. Get the adrenaline flowing, worry about what's being left behind, etc. so I can't concentrate well on complicated tasks.
So it doesn't make sense for me to work on a long post. It would be terribly garbled and descend too far into academic doublespeak.
But, just quickly, on the private property front, the ability to have private property is dependent on both a civic culture that legitimizes it and a state (judicial, police, etc.) that will enforce those rights. Without that, the next gang that cruises down your street and likes your property is the owner.
On the argument that the maladministrations of the Bush folk undermine the argument for the essential character of the state in modern society, the usual counter argument that bad application doesn't undermine essential social function applies.
It's hard, to say just a bit more, to get from serious libertarian argument, Nozick for instance, to an analysis of the state.
But, then, I'm well into defenses of the welfare state. Just to give you an idea of where I sit in all this. I think a robust welfare state is in all our long term interests.
More to talk about. |
