this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2024
278 points (86.6% liked)

Comics

5854 readers
180 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine πŸ‡΅πŸ‡Έ . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago (3 children)

So the blanket my grandmother knitted me when I was a baby? Am I justifying my ownership of that property via coercion and the threat of violence?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If someone came to take it, how're you going to stop that? At the end there are only physical barriers to ownership of anything.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I mean, I think you're hugely discounting psychological barriers, if nothing else. Most people are decent and wouldn't steal the blanket, even if they wanted it.

Ownership of things is a pretty intrinsic part of human existence, and humans are deeply social creatures. There are a lot of non-physical aspects that influence people's concept of ownership.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

i think you misjudge the amount of people whos only limiting factor is consequences few people wiuld give a fuck if thats you deceased childs blanket and only memory of said child

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

That's the reason (some) people don't take it. I'm not saying I agree with it, but it's bullshit to pretend only some types of property are voluntary.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I think my issue is less with the idea that property is protected with violence.

The point of the original comic though was that one is justified in using violence to take from the rich because they only have/maintain their property with violence.

But if all property is maintained by violence, am I not then justified in taking any property I see fit? If so, is it free reign to take the property of those whose ability to protect it with violence is minimal? Am I justified in stealing from children or the disabled, since they are protecting their property with the threat of violence?

The fact of the matter is that none of us want to live in that world, so we give over that threat of violence to the state. The state holds a monopoly on violence and notionally uses it to meet out it's use in an equitable and just way.

When the state is bad at that, that can be reason to work towards the restructure of the state, but it's never a reason (imo) to simply violate the law.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

I'm a voluntarist, I only agree with violence in response to aggression so. I also tend to stick to the sidelines most of the time.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

but it’s never a reason (imo) to simply violate the law.

In your world how do unjust laws that benefit those who control the violence get changed?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Ideally through the civic channels that exist to accomplish change. Run for office. Campaign for reform. Pass the BAR and join a firm that does pro-bono work fighting for important issues.

But if all that fails, there is certainly a point where the people need to rise up and overthrow an unjust government.

But what I'm arguing is never justified is violence against other citizens just because they benefit from the unjust system. If the system is unjust, fix the system, don't lash out at those who just benefit from it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

I agree with you, ownership is more nuanced than threat of violence. And threat of violence is more nuanced than power and control. If somebody tried to take your blanket, then you may be inclined to report it to the police, and men with guns would show up at his house and take it back for you. That doesn't make you an oppressor.