Garrett Roth Discusses Use and Occupancy

This isn't the whole lecture, unfortunately, but it does say a bit about the Use and Occupancy condition. It is nice to hear anarcho-capitalists admit the libertarianness of it.

I could save this next topic for a different post, but I'll address it here too. Some people point to the American Indians getting run off their land by white men who quote Locke, and question why the labor-mixing standard should be used anyway. My answer is two-fold: first, if people aren't entitled to the full product of their labor, then they don't own their labor, and they are slaves. So any notion of ownership that does not regard labor is going to be an apology for enslavement (and you will have some notion of ownership). Secondly, there are only two standards for ownership: one recognizes the last receiver of a chain of voluntary transfers going back to the original appropriator (the one who mixed his labor with it) as the legitimate owner; the other does things this way.