Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Jan Bruun Andersen
474 followers -
"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn." /Alvin Toffler 
"The illiterate of the 21st century will not be those who cannot read and write, but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn." /Alvin Toffler 

474 followers
About
Jan's posts

Post has attachment
Dämp eran förväntningar. Det kan bli en het sommar i Frankrike. 

Post has attachment

Post has attachment
Det går fantastisk i Sverige... 

Sekundärkränkt: Ett svensk(?) fenomen. Att berätta hur någon annan från en annan "grupp" än den man själv tillhör känner sig kränkt. 

Post has attachment
Han har ret så langt at politiske partier, som et nødvendigt element i et repræsentativt demokrati, har udspillet sin rolle. Partierne og deres struktur var nødvendige i en tid da brevduer var det hurtigste middel til langdistancekommunikation og massekommunikation skete en-vejs via aviser. I en sådant samfund fungerer direkte demokrati ikke. Da kræves en struktur med lokal partiforeninger, lokale partirepræsentanter, landsmøder og hele molevitten.

Men i dag kan vi afskaffe alle disse mellemled og politisk interesserede borgere kan direkte meddele sin representant i byråd og Folketing hvad de synes, og repræsentanten kan melde tilbage, spørge, diskutere og lave afstemninger for at afklare hvilken knap han/hun skal trykke på. 

Post has attachment
Han har ret så langt at politiske partier, som et nødvendigt element i et repræsentativt demokrati, har udspillet sin rolle. Partierne og deres struktur var nødvendige i en tid da brevduer var det hurtigste middel til langdistancekommunikation og massekommunikation skete en-vejs via aviser. I en sådant samfund fungerer direkte demokrati ikke. Da kræves en struktur med lokal partiforeninger, lokale partirepræsentanter, landsmøder og hele molevitten.

Men i dag kan vi afskaffe alle disse mellemled og politisk interesserede borgere kan direkte meddele sin representant i byråd og Folketing hvad de synes, og repræsentanten kan melde tilbage, spørge, diskutere og lave afstemninger for at afklare hvilken knap han/hun skal trykke på. 

Post has shared content

Post has attachment
In another thread about the legitimacy of state controlled borders (https://plus.google.com/109523639475912314853/posts/W9UHw2QxDYM), the discussion between +Brian Boring​​, +Mysterous Apocalypse, +Lady Catfish​​, and others ​ touched upon trespassing the airspace above privately owned land - or if it was trespassing at all.

Brian claims that no one can own the air space immediately above them. In a response to https://plus.google.com/103795218382126951619 he wrote:

"I deny your claim that all the air above you is your property. Valid property claims come from original appropriation (homesteading) or voluntary exchange. You have no such claim to the air several thousand feet above your property."

Brian also, at one point, stated that:

"Libertarianism is three simple principles:

Self Ownership
The Non-Aggression Principle
Voluntary Association

Here are my thoughts about this, and how I will resolve the conflict about who owns the airspace and to what degree. I welcome your comments.

Self-ownership - I hope we can all agree on this. At least for adults.

Property rights and homesteading - I am no big libertarian scholar or theorists, but if I understand the argument or goes something like this: By using one's body and one's self-ownership to work, improve and add value to otherwise un-owned land, that land becomes private property. Plowing the land, build a bridge, drain a swamp, build a smithy - it all adds value and thus the area becomes private property.

But what about the air? How does one turn airspace into private air space? How does one work air, improve it, add value to it?

I see several ways. Installing big air filters to remove pollution might be considered improving it and adding value to it. Building and operating an airport on the ground increases its value (except for the noise and pollution). But there are also less tangible ways

The land owner could be operating a nudist recreational facility. Then an airspace without flying drones of unknown origin zipping back and forth will certainly have value.

Or simply by living under a clear sky without having to worry about chem-trails. That will have value for some.

I think +Brian Boring​​ is wrong when he rejects property claims for the air above a given (land) property as it can have value for the land owner. Unauthorised use diminishes that value.

If airspace cannot be property, what about a lake? Can one homestead X millions gallons of water in a lake? Am I free to sail back and forth on a lake located inside Brian's property? 

Post has shared content
But what about hairy inside hands?
And nearsightness?
Or a feeling of entitlement?
A sudden need for safe spaces? 

Post has shared content
About those fake news... 
Wait while more posts are being loaded