102
nope nap
(quokk.au)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Jan 2026
102 points (92.5% liked)
Comic Strips
21054 readers
226 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- AI-generated comics aren't allowed.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Someone smarter than me is probably gonna own me after this comment, and I know this is a comic so it can't include a ton of nuance, but if I willingly exchange/gift my property to someone else, they didn't gain it through violence (state or otherwise). Sure, the threat of violence might prevent someone else from breaking the social contract, but it isn't like the buyer did something unethical to acquire the property.
The comic, and the deeper philosophical meaning talks about a lower bound, not an upper bound (pick your own point of reference).
What is necessary to force a system against somebody else's will. A gift or exchange implies agreement and cooperation.
I feel like this quote from Elite: Dangerous sums up well, the lower bound.
In the comic, the other animals that freely decided to abide by the non-aggression principle lacked a way to ensure compliance by those, outside of the contract.
Not amassing power is a good way to prevent internal threats, but in case of external threats, which will amass power, this makes it too weak.
Unethical is a matter of prospective and degrees.
This pig is obviously a capitalist libertarian private property owner stand-in. If you exploit other people's labor by paying them a wage lower than the value of their labor, you are effectively stealing from them. Profits are theft via extortion.
You may say "they both agree to this, that's what makes it ethical". I disagree. If you are held at gunpoint, you will do what the person says, it doesn't mean it was willing. This is called being "under duress". If not working for a property owner means that you face homelessness, starvation, and police violence; your life is similarly threatened.
For sure. I'm only taking issue with the last panel's broad assertion that any gain of property is the result of violence. The landlord in this comic is an asshat.
the owner abused the poor people, because he has a capital and they don't. and he will now charge them everything they have for the rest of their lives.
in wild west, people used guns to take everything from you, we live in a world where people with money convinced people without them to forgo weapons and accept money as a means to play the same game, and he used his money against them in the exact same manner as he would use the weapons. and so you can argue it is unethical in a same way as being robbed at gunpoint.
and this their power is only power because we tolerate it. this comics is about what happens when we finally stop.