Libertarianism and the Enviroment

[BarefootJoe]

Hello,

Someone recently stumped me on a question on the libertarian philosophy. I said that that in a libertarian government the average person would be able to go to court for the damages to the environment that another caused. He replied that it would be near impossible for an individual to win a case against a corporation due to their very good legal team. How would I respond to that? What would our protection from our corporations pollution be?

 

[mediahasyou]

The current court system is already ruled by inexperienced juries that can be persuaded by good legal teams.

If the public court system was abolished, people might seek courts with benefits like a court that is known to be mostly persuaded by truth, not good legal tactics.

 

[dannno]

Hello,

Someone recently stumped me on a question on the libertarian philosophy. I said that that in a libertarian government the average person would be able to go to court for the damages to the environment that another caused. He replied that it would be near impossible for an individual to win a case against a corporation due to their very good legal team. How would I respond to that? What would our protection from our corporations pollution be?

Well one of the reasons these corporations are so big in the first place is because of the environmental regulations that allow them to damage others' property without reciprocation.

When the Industrial Revolution was beginning, people WERE successfully suing companies who polluted their property and big industry did not like this. So they went to government and had them write regulations so that they could legally pollute. Now they are rich and can afford good legal teams, but we don't want to go back to being able to protect our property because they are too rich, so we should keep letting them write environmental regulations? Because you know the big corporations lobby D.C. and have all of their rules and regulations written for them..

But here's the thing.. If Company A is polluting Person A's property, and they have evidence that they have done damage to their property, then even the best legal team in the world isn't going to convince a jury that they are some how in the 'right', UNLESS they can use legal justification of regulations. However in a free market environment where the polluter simply reciprocates and fixes the damage done to the property owner, there are no legal justifications.

 

[BarefootJoe]

Thanks for the posts guys, dannno sorry to be picky but do you have any sources for the comment about the industrial revolution?

 

[Wesker1982]

What if police or judges and courts should be venal and biased — what if they should bias their decisions, for example, in favor of particularly wealthy clients?...



Text

 

[josh b]

Well one of the reasons these corporations are so big in the first place is because of the environmental regulations that allow them to damage others' property without reciprocation.

This is an irony that many leftists can't wrap their heads around.

BarefootJoe, have you watched this before? I don't remember if it mentions the industrial revolution but it concerns this topic.

 

[dannno]

Thanks for the posts guys, dannno sorry to be picky but do you have any sources for the comment about the industrial revolution?

Ron Paul in the Reagan Library Debates from the 2008 Primary.

You don't need to ask Ron Paul for the source on that, afterall he was there.





















j/k

 

[BarefootJoe]

I just watched the Walter Block video and it had a very good argument. Thanks for all the help though.

 

[goRPaul]

Dannno makes a good point about the regulations. The more laws there are, the more a well paid corporate lawyer can weasel around them. Without regulations, all that is needed is proof of property damage.

I just read Harry Browne on the environment in his book "The Great Libertarian Offer". He cites statistics that show the majority of pollution is done by government, and the majority of land polluted is government land. Why would gov't officials and agents care about land that they themselves don't personally own? The federal government needs to sell most of the 29% of American land it owns. Let private owners protect the land against polluters.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Dannno makes a good point about the regulations. The more laws there are, the more a well paid corporate lawyer can weasel around them. Without regulations, all that is needed is proof of property damage.

I just read Harry Browne on the environment in his book "The Great Libertarian Offer". He cites statistics that show the majority of pollution is done by government, and the majority of land polluted is government land. Why would gov't officials and agents care about land that they themselves don't personally own? The federal government needs to sell most of the 29% of American land it owns. Let private owners protect the land against polluters.

Thanks for bringing that up. I'd forgotten it. IOU a +rep.