Dear Mr. Kinsella,
I am [], greets again. I hope this message finds you well. Sorry to bother you, but I would like to ask you a question regarding “use-based property” and argumentation ethics.
We know that capitalists own means of production, often through inheritance. However, if we cannot determine historically who first acquired these means, or whether the property was originally obtained through theft, it is usually justified under the principle of homesteading. My question is: if we cannot provide ontological evidence for the ownership of scarce resources, and if a resource is not in active use, would such ownership be illegitimate?
From argumentation ethics, we understand that aggression cannot be justified, and that self-ownership along with the property rights derived from it cannot be denied. But let us consider the following case: suppose an employer owns means of production. We cannot be certain whether these means were acquired legitimately through labor, voluntary exchange, or otherwise. Furthermore, the employer does not directly use the means of production but hires workers to operate them. In this situation, wouldn’t the workers be the actual owners through homesteading?
In light of this, do you think “use-based property” can be reconciled with, or removed from, argumentation ethics?
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
Kinsella:
See if this answers your question:
- Rothbard on the “Original Sin” in Land Titles: 1969 vs. 1974 (Nov. 5, 2014)
- Mises, Rothbard, and Hoppe on the “Original Sin” in the Distribution of Property Rights (Oct. 7, 2014)
- Many of these issues are also discussed in Legal Foundations of a Free Society, e.g. in ch. 2, n.36, ch. 11, n.12, ch. 25, text at n.42
In short: you don’t need to trace title back to Adam. When there are two claimants—current possessor/presumed owner A, and challenger B, then the current possessor A is presumed to be the owner, unless he is an aggressor or stole it. Someone B claiming better title to the property needs to prove it, and the obvious way is to trace title back to a common ancestor C, and see who has better title. You don’t need to prove C owned it, you only need to trace it back from A or B to C.
