From: Christopher Hudert <heyhoot-AT-mindspring.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:29:49 -0400
To: puptcrit-AT-lists.driftline.org
Subject: Re: [Puptcrit] Theft or not?


  Interesting, Daniel. But I'm not buying it. Most cultures and 
societies, Western or not, had/have some concept of, and issue with, 
theft. There were/are certainly communal properties, and personal 
properties in these societies. I don't really want to enter into a long 
debate about this, but I can think of no society where everything was 
communal, particularly when it came to weapons and spouses. Even in 
communal societies (successful and long lasting one at least) there 
was/is a respect for property and negative consequence for theft - 
taking for oneself what belonged to another, be that other a person or 
the community. I am thinking about American Indian, African, early 
European, Chinese, Japanese, and all others I can recall. Even most 
social animal societies have that.
  It was/is often thought of as a different issue to take something for 
the good of the community. Usually this was/is "earned" through battle 
(bounty - riches, slaves, wives, supplies, land, etc), by the use of 
skill and/or wit (winning of a contest, reward for doing something, 
etc.) merely by being the power of government, or a combination 
thereof.
   I've got to dismount this rant now, or it will get out of control.

Christopher

On Aug 21, 2006, at 2:31 PM, Kismet wrote:

> OF course it is always worth keeping in mind that theft, like 
> "property" is
> a very western concept and that many cultures....in the minority now 
> for
> obvious reasons....had no concept of "property" and therefore no 
> issues,
> moral or spiritual, with theft.
> Just a thought
>
> Daniel
>

_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-lists.driftline.org
Admin interface: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/puptcrit-driftline.org
Archives: http://www.driftline.org