From: O
Sent: Fri 5/27/2016 4:00 PM
To: wblock@loyno.edu
Subject: Public Property
Dear Professor Block,
In an anarcho-capitalist society, all property would of course be privately owned, and it would be up to those private owners to decide what would be permitted on their property. Right now though, we have a significant amount of public property, and this isn’t going to change any time soon. So what is the libertarian view on what should be permitted on public property, for as long as we have it?
Many libertarians say that as long as the action does not violate the non-aggression principle, then it should be permitted, so street prostitution, public nudity, public begging, DUI etc would all be allowed. I don’t quite agree with this though. Surely it is better to ask: if this public property were privately owned, who would it likely be owned by, and what would they likely allow & prohibit? In this way we can attempt to approximate a free society as closely as possible.
Any road company that wanted to stay in business would of course have speed limits, and ban driving while under the influence of cocaine, since people generally want to use safe roads and will pay extra for it. I suppose we can also assume that small streets would be privately owned by those who live in the homes on those streets, and that they would prohibit public nudity, begging, and street prostitution, since they are generally nuisances.
So I would say that endorsing a ban on all of these things is consistent with libertarianism. Most public property is not un-owned property, but rather de-facto privately owned. However this logic clearly must not be abused to argue that the state should (say) ban the burqa in public places, something which may well happen in an ancap society, perhaps in a conservative Christian neighborhood. I’m sure you agree however that for as long as the state owns roads, it should enforce speed and traffic light laws. So where exactly does one draw the line?
Kind regards, O
Dear O:
I draw the “line” at threats. Why do I put quotes around “line?” Because of considerations mentioned in this article:
Block, Walter E. and William Barnett II. 2008. “Continuums” Journal Etica e Politica / Ethics & Politics, Vol. 1, pp. 151-166 June; http://www2.units.it/~etica/; http://www2.units.it/~etica/2008_1/BLOCKBARNETT.pdf
So, what are threats in this context? Driving drunk, or stoned, or at 100 miles per hour is a threat. Public nudity, prostitution, are not threats. Thus, the former should be prohibited (but not by the state, see below), not the latter, at least as I see matters.
I agree with most of what you have to say, except for the last paragraph. I don’t think that endorsing a ban on all of these things is consistent with libertarianism. I don’t agree that most, or even any, public property is de-facto privately owned (it is only de-jure privately owned). According to your logic the state should indeed ban the burqa in public places, since this indeed may well happen in an ancap society, very likely in a conservative Christian neighborhood. I do not agree that for as long as the state owns roads, it should enforce speed and traffic light laws. Right now, the government kills some 40,000 people on its roads annually. It is not at all clear, from a pragmatic point of view, that things would not improve if the state fully absented itself from this area of the economy. From a deontological point of view, it is clear that the government should immediately cease and desist ALL of its activity. I’d push that button.
I have written, at least peripherally, about these sorts of issues here:
Block, Walter E. 2006. “Radical Libertarianism: Applying Libertarian Principles to Dealing with the Unjust Government, Part II” Reason Papers, Vol. 28, Spring, pp. 85-109; http://www.walterblock.com/publications/block_radical-libertarianism-rp.pdf; http://www.walterblock.com/wp-content/uploads/publications/block_radical-libertarianism-rp.pdf; http://www.reasonpapers.com/pdf/28/rp_28_7.pdf; (death penalty justified, net taxpayer, ruling class analysis p. 87)
Block, Walter E. 2009A. “Toward a Libertarian Theory of Guilt and Punishment for the Crime of Statism” in Hulsmann, Jorg Guido and Stephan Kinsella, eds., Property, Freedom and Society: Essays in Honor of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Auburn, AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute, pp. 137-148; http://mises.org/books/hulsmann-kinsella_property-freedom-society-2009.pdf;
http://mises.org/books/property_freedom_society_kinsella.pdf; festschrift
Block, Walter E. 2009B. “Libertarian punishment theory: working for, and donating to, the state” Libertarian Papers, Vol. 1;http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/; http://libertarianpapers.org/2009/17-libertarian-punishment-theory-working-for-and-donating-to-the-state/#comments
4:59 pm on February 19, 2019 Email Walter E. Block
