Self-ownership is the only logically and ethically consistent solution to the problem of human ownership, and it is the only one likely to result in peaceful cooperation rather than violent conflict. Self-ownership means an individual has full claim over his own body and time. Once one accepts the premise of self-ownership, a coherent framework for understanding rights, justice, and non-aggression emerges. This principle extends to what a man may produce as a consequence of these choices, i.e., property. Aggression can be understood as the use or threat of violence to control another person's body or time, and any physical aggression against an individual would be a violation of his right to property of himself.

It is difficult to argue against self-ownership and the system of property rights if one understands property rights as the only workable solution to economic scarcity and subjectively values peace and civilization. Any such argument can be seen as transparently self-serving hypocrisy. Rather than an intelligent argument arising from human reason, this argument is nothing more than an appeal that we return to the mores of subhuman animals controlled entirely by their instincts, unable to employ reason. Arguing against self-ownership is effectively arguing against your own personhood, because it makes it clear you cannot respect property rights and cannot be part of a civilized social order. It is a plea to be considered an animal. Although economic theory does not dictate political ideology, understanding economic scarcity and subjectively valuing peace and civilization will incline a person to adopt a libertarian outlook. There are no alternatives to self- ownership that do not result in propagating conflict and engendering enmity and resentment between individuals and groups.

- nostr:npub1gdu7w6l6w65qhrdeaf6eyywepwe7v7ezqtugsrxy7hl7ypjsvxksd76nak