31.01.2013 Views

The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

The Privatization of Roads and Highways - Ludwig von Mises Institute

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Roads</strong> <strong>and</strong> the Immigration Issue 217<br />

this “however” is the crux <strong>of</strong> the argument, not all property is<br />

owned privately at present.<br />

Surprise!, the evil government owns larges swatches <strong>of</strong> it,<br />

mainly in Alaska <strong>and</strong> west <strong>of</strong> the Mississippi, but throughout<br />

every state in the nation, without exception. 5<br />

This being the case, no permission <strong>of</strong> any extant l<strong>and</strong>lord is<br />

needed. Homesteading is a one-way arrangement, not a two-way<br />

one, such as foreign trade or investment. If Americans act like<br />

sheep <strong>and</strong> decline to homestead these unowned areas, in defiance<br />

<strong>of</strong> their government, they can have no proper objection if<br />

foreigners show a bit more initiative <strong>and</strong> spunk. Nor is the objection<br />

tenable from the anti-immigration perspective that Americans<br />

“really” own these unsettled tracts <strong>of</strong> l<strong>and</strong> or, worse, that the<br />

government does. For surely it is an uncontroversial premise (at<br />

least within the libertarian community) that the only just source<br />

<strong>of</strong> private property rights is homesteading, <strong>and</strong>, thus, anyone<br />

interfering with a homesteader peacefully going about his business<br />

is guilty <strong>of</strong> the initiation <strong>of</strong> violence. Since there is no reason<br />

to distinguish between foreign <strong>and</strong> domestic would-be homesteaders,<br />

the case for precluding the former (or the latter, certainly)<br />

on grounds <strong>of</strong> trespass vanishes.<br />

How does this argument fit in with the institution <strong>of</strong> private<br />

roads? Simple. Assume that the foreign homesteaders helicopter<br />

over to unowned (that is, government claimed) l<strong>and</strong> in, say, central<br />

Wyoming, <strong>and</strong> begin to settle there. Can they enter onto the<br />

private roads, <strong>and</strong> have surface access to the entire country,<br />

indeed, to all <strong>of</strong> North America? Or, will they be confined to<br />

5 For example, state <strong>and</strong> federal government own 95.8 percent <strong>of</strong> Alaska,<br />

87.8 percent <strong>of</strong> Nevada, 75.2 percent <strong>of</strong> Utah <strong>and</strong> 60.4 percent <strong>of</strong> Oregon; on<br />

the other h<strong>and</strong>, east <strong>of</strong> the Mississippi the holdings are more modest. For<br />

example, 1.5 percent <strong>of</strong> Rhode Isl<strong>and</strong>, 6.2 percent <strong>of</strong> Connecticut, 6.3 percent<br />

<strong>of</strong> Massachusetts, 7.4 percent <strong>of</strong> Delaware <strong>and</strong> 7.6 percent <strong>of</strong> Maryl<strong>and</strong>.<br />

For the U.S. as a whole, the figure is 39.8 percent. See on this:<br />

http://www.nwi.org/Maps/L<strong>and</strong>Chart.html

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!