Call yourself whatever you want but as long as you grant greater rights to original appropriators of scarce (rivalrous) resources relative to latecomers, then we are allies. All human conflict concerns scarce resources, so the solution to every human conflict is determining who is the owner of the scarce resource in question. What I’m calling latecomerism is a belief that latecomers should have greater rights to scarce resources than do original appropriators (homesteaders). Latecomerism necessarily entails “might makes right”, the total destruction of any possibility of property rights. Statism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, criminalism, archism, Georgism, Lockean Proviso-ism, intellectual property, are all examples of latecomerism. In my mind canon only anarcho-capitalism is consistent with property rights by original appropriation and totally opposes latecomerism. As long as your anarcho-whatever is consistent with property rights by original appropriation, then it necessarily falls under the umbrella of anarcho-capitalism. Again, since every human conflict concerns scarce resources, every human conflict concerns property rights. Get property rights correct and everything else (non-aggression principle, free markets) logically follows. And that’s today’s two cents.
On Property Rights III
OK, Mr. Collins, I understand your point. However, In the case of IP, a writer creates with his skill, a work that would not exist without his efforts. Isn’t it stealing not to compensate him for reading his work? He is a Homesteader, not a Latecomer, why are you against IP?
This is why: https://everything-voluntary.com/on-ideas
If a creator doesn’t want their work copied, they must keep it secret. Once it’s entered my brain, it’s mine to do with as I please. I’m not your slave.