• PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s pretty standard private property ideas. Most are still kind of stuck in the (leftist definition) capitalist version of property where you kind of assume everything is already owned by someone and we toil for property.

      I don’t think it’s necessary to go down that path, but I’m sort of neutral on how society chooses to handle it. I prefer the more homestead/robust abandonment types.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Current standard property ideas require a robust central government to catalogue who owns what and enforce everyone’s rights. Is that permissible under libertarianism?

        • Forester@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Depends what flavor you endorse. I don’t know the exact numbers but I would wager about half of us are minarchists. So the catalog part would be out the window but in theory, there would still be a strong legal system based on contracts upheld by basic government to hold a court system for disputes.

        • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Depends heavily on the libertarian. Big tent and all. I’d consider most libertarians minarchists that are willing to accept some government for things they don’t feel can be handled voluntarily. Usually property, defense, police, fire and most court shit.

          For ancaps/voluntarists check out poly-centric law.

          There are quite a few ideas mostly based on how people think we can least coerce others with violence and how imaginative they are.

          Trade is a technology that has to be developed. If you freeze it then you halt progress. The best we can think of now may not be the best way tomorrow.