John Stossel discusses the experience of his liberal brainwashing at the hands of Marxist college professors:
I love the opening comments made by one of the students who says:
“Liberty is an extension of my body. Because I own my body, I own the product of my labor. I own the property I produce with my labor. Therefore no one has a right to take my property without my consent.”
Indeed, his comments form the core of the non-aggression principle, which is predicated on self-ownership and the property rights that follow from that.
If one takes a moment to think about it, the libertarian definition of property rights is the only definition that allows for peaceful co-existence. All other definitions of property rights ultimately entail the initiation of violence, which is distinctly different than the use of violence for self-defense or defense of property.
The moral philosophy of libertarian property rights is spelled out in this fantastic video:
If we say that someone else has a higher claim on the product of my labor than I do, then it obviously follows that I am not the owner of the product of my labor. I am merely a allowed to keep an arbitrary portion of what I produce, which my owner has deemed appropriate. My owner may arbitrarily change his mind about how much he will allow me to keep as my own from time to time.
If I don’t ultimately own the product of my labor, then it follows that I must not own myself. Someone else must have a higher claim on my person than I do in order to make me work for them by taking what I produce against my consent. This is tantamount to slavery.
Given that people will naturally defend themselves AND that which they have labored to produce, the initiation of violence (or the threat thereof) is necessary in order for someone else to take that which I have labored to produce against my consent.
This state of affairs becomes readily apparent if one considers how slavery operated in the South. The slaves did not own the product of their labor, their masters claimed that for themselves, and then handed out a portion of what the slaves had produced back to the slaves.
The only difference between the Southern slavery of blacks and the way tax slavery operates today is that rather than directly taking the physical product of a slave’s labor, the State takes the money a slave has bartered his final product for. This allows slaves to work in the occupation of their choosing, while ownership of the slave’s labor is still ultimately retained by someone other than the slave himself.
This use of coercion has resulted in modern day “tax farms” which most people call “nation states.”
Learn more about tax farms and the wars and misery they have caused the human race here:
The initiation of violence (or threat thereof) necessarily result when the self-ownership principle is not enforced by society.
If we look to those countries who are worst off in this world, they have all had a long history of ignoring private property rights. Only those countries who have had a history of strong (relatively speaking) property rights enforcement have become prosperous as nation states.
Any deviation from this path has lead to nothing but human misery.