GC

 FROM Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laissez-faire#Socialism

Gary Chartier offers an understanding of property rights as contingent yet tightly constrained social strategies, reflective of the importance of multiple, overlapping rationales for separate ownership and of natural law principles of practical reasonableness, defending robust yet non-absolute protections for these rights in a manner similar to that employed by David Hume.[96] This account is distinguished both from Lockean and neo-Lockean views which deduce property rights from the idea of self-ownership and from consequentialist accounts that might license widespread ad hoc interference with the possessions of groups and individuals.[97] Chartier uses this account to ground a clear statement of the natural law basis for the view that solidaristic wealth redistribution by individual persons is often morally required, but as a response by individuals and grass-roots networks to particular circumstances rather than as a state-driven attempt to achieve a particular distributive pattern.[98] He advances detailed arguments for workplace democracy rooted in such natural law principles as subsidiarity,[99] defending it as morally desirable and as a likely outcome of the elimination of injustice rather than as something to be mandated by the state.[100]


Chartier has discussed natural law approaches to land reform and to the occupation of factories by workers.[101] He objects on natural law grounds to intellectual property protections, drawing on his theory of property rights more generally[102] and develops a general natural law account of boycotts.[103] He has argued that proponents of genuinely freed markets should explicitly reject capitalism and identify with the global anti-capitalist movement while emphasizing that the abuses the anti-capitalist movement highlights result from state-tolerated violence and state-secured privilege rather than from voluntary cooperation and exchange. According to Chartier, "it makes sense for [freed-market advocates] to name what they oppose 'capitalism.' Doing so calls attention to the freedom movement's radical roots, emphasizes the value of understanding society as an alternative to the state, underscores the fact that proponents of freedom object to non-aggressive as well as aggressive restraints on liberty, ensures that advocates of freedom aren't confused with people who use market rhetoric to prop up an unjust status quo, and expresses solidarity between defenders of freed markets and workers — as well as ordinary people around the world who use "capitalism" as a short-hand label for the world-system that constrains their freedom and stunts their lives".[93][104]

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Left Ro

Left Rothbardian  Left Rothbardian is a belief that hat property can only be legitimately owned by two means: direct trade from the past owner of that property to a new owner or the potential new owner applying the labor to unowned land. This puts a claim on the confiscation of the private property, in particular the part about applying the potential new owner’s labor to said unowned property (Applying it to 'ill gotten property') is legitimate leads to legitimate ownership of that property. The difference between the Classic homesteading principle and this Neo Lockean principle is that the first means also accepts the Lockean proviso as legit, which states that the homesteading principle only applies so long as there is enough of and of the same quality for everybody else, while this Neo Lockean principle rejects this. It heavily advocates for the respect of private property as a natural right which it derives from the right of self ownership. However it does not see property ...
Read more

My political views that I have

I am a Neoclassical   Libertarian -Paleolibertarian, Classical Liberal and Social Democrat (Third Way and by extention  Libe r al  S oci a list )  I support a Red-green-brown alliance between Center Left-Leftish ‘Grifters’ (like Joe Rogan, Tulsi Gabbard, BJG, Glenn Greenwald, Bill Maher etc), Boll weevil Democrats, Social Democrats USA , Muslim House Caucus (Democrats), Forward (US) Party and the House Freedom Caucus-AmericaFirst Republicans As it is now, my loyalty is to the above groups I would like to make the US etc as conservative as it was in the 1980s (with a twist) which I hope can happen via the Red-green-brown alliance Once I accomplish that, I will then make the US etc more liberal then it would have been if I didn't make our country 1980s conservative but with a twist (since me trying to make our world more liberal in that world unlike in this world would be counter cultural just like in the 1960s it was counter cultural to fight for liberal causes). That...
Read more

Ethnic/Racial views

 Ethnicity/race I support the right of self determination for these groups of the US: blacks, Native Americans, Hispanics-Latinos, Hawaiians, Asians, Arabs and Pacific Islanders While I morally (moral as in moral victory) support Affirmative Action, I want color blind hiring and gender blind hiring to replace Quota hiring such as Affirmative Action at some point in the next few decades.  I feel Affirmative Action and quotas may negatively effect BIPOC+ confidence and motivation by making it seem that they aren't good enough to get those jobs without Affirmative Action or quotas. There are no safeguards for Affirmative Action and quotas for some of the BIPOC+ who get fired or quit do to being underqualified for their jobs. This article  generally reflects some to many of my thoughts I have on race-ethnicity. Some of my other views on race-ethnicity match the views of BGJ’s views on race-ethnicity I echo what Judge John Roberts said on this: "The way to stop discrimina...
Read more