We had a philosophy department picnic on Saturday, at Lake Wahburg, which is this pretty little place owned by the University. We kayaked a little, but failed to see any alligators. We also consumed much of Ludwig's world-famous marinated flank steak, really good guacamole, hummus, brownies, Holly's famous chocolate-chip pumpkin muffins.. it was a good day.

Except that we really wanted to swim (uh.. jump off the dock), but there were little cones around saying No Swimming, apparently because no lifeguard was around. So we walk up to the boathouse to ask about a lifeguard, and we were told that "there was something in the water."

Seriously, how scary is that? The entire lake was closed because there was "something in the water." Like... a giant gator? With chainsaw attachments and homicidal instincts? Lasers, even? Or maybe just skin-dissolving parasites. In the end, we didn't get to swim. Boo.

I did get a good conversation in with Carlos and his very pretty wife Maria though. They're both law people, and Maria is working on her dissertation in Spanish, and we got to talking about what justice is, and what the responsibility of the state and the judicial system is. It ended up being the two Columbians and Moti versus me. They were the hardcore socialists, and I was libertarian through and through.

But they did bring up many good points, put more clearly than I have ever heard it put, and argued more convincingly than I have ever encountered. Very roughly, their position was that the purpose of the government and justice system is to distribute resources evenly - what is called distributive justice. So, if you earn alot of money, the state can (and should) take some of that money and use it to help the poor, the hungry, the unfortunate. My position was that the government and justice system should be about protecting property - what I earn is mine, and the government should help ensure no one, not even itself, can take it away from me without my consent. It might be really nice for me to help the less fortunate, but it cannot be the case that the state can compel me to do so against my will. The right kind of justice, on my view, is corrective and protective, not distributive.

A simple thought experiment might serve to draw out intuitions on this issue. Say, you have someone born to a rich family, who then, through inheritance, becomes obscenely rich. On the other hand, you have someone born to a poor family, who is finding it really hard to scratch out even a meagre existence. The socialists would say that the state is justified in taking money from one to give to the other. I say it is never justified - legalized looting is still looting. I will not pay higher taxes just so you can get healthcare you couldn't afford otherwise, so you can have more children, so you can have subsidized housing. If you haven't earned it, these are things you don't deserve, and it cannot be morally right to give someone something he does not deserve, just like it cannot be morally right to withhold from someone something he does deserve.



And now, for something a little lighter - PHILHOUSE, in green!