DrFlipper
Joined 3 years ago
Joined 3 years ago
(I am a fascist, for the record.)
No coercion (voluntary transaction, no state involvement): "I'll sell you this widget, but only if you agree to bring it to me for any repairs." "Ok."
Coercion (state intervention): "Hi, I see you are about to sell your widget to that other guy who would like to buy it, knowing only you can perform any future repairs. If you go ahead, I will use the full force of the justice system to punish you, up to and including death."
I realise this is unrealistically ideal. The language is very important to get right though. You are advocating for coercion for the common good, not the absence of it. The state is impotent without violence, you don't need to shy away from it. State == force.
If people wish to voluntarily trade vehicles without the "right to repair", that's their choice, that's capitalism. The state intervening in transactions one way or the other is a violation of the capitalist ideal.
There's some other cause (which can't be said aloud).