A State that protects property by definition cannot be legitimate. - TopicsExpress

A State that protects property by definition cannot be legitimate. To illustrate this, let us unpack a part of Proudhons argument that lead to the famous words: “property is theft”. The classical justifications for property are based on tradition, law, and labour. Now, property as a tradition does not make it legitimate, it rather dismisses the debate about its legitimacy. Similarly, simply making property legal does not legitimise it. Finally, because of the division – and the socialisation – of labour, no one can really make a claim that they have exclusive property over something. Hence, claiming property on one of those grounds is illegitimate. Moreover, property is the cause of inequalities, hence, the State, as protector of property, is therefore also illegitimate. Anarchism and Liberal Democracy: Critique and Paths to Explore - John-Erik Hansson

StopTech 83.150.0047.63 High Performance Brake Kit Rear

Japan provides assistance for Provision of an Outside-Broadcasting

Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen

You have heard me teach many things that have been confirmed by

Amigos, ai vai minha contribuição: Tive a iniciativa de criar