MichaelM, you have still not explained how these principles come from logic.
The logic supporting the definition of property is in the post I cited. If you have specific questions, then ask them.
Who decides what is "moral and just" and thus what a government should do and what is not "moral and just" and thus what it should not do?
This is an invalid question. It presumes the answer will be that some "who", i.e., some person—some consciousness—will decide, and it isn't, so your question has precluded the correct answer.
Morality and justice are normative questions that deal with what men
ought to do—with what kinds of actions will lead to a successful life, both individually and socially. A successful life is one that is consistent with the requirements of one's own nature.
All living entities have a specific nature. Those that exist in the right conditions and are not prevented from acting in accordance with their nature will be successful. A species of tree the nature of which requires abundant moisture will thrive on the edge of a pond but have an unsuccessful life if a drought dries up the pond. When botanists define what a tree
ought to have in order to survive and flourish, they derive a set of rules from their understanding of the fundamental nature of the tree itself. What it
is determines the conditions it
ought to exist in if it is to be a perfect instance of its species. Philosophers and blog posters who say you cannot get an
ought from an
is are severely logic challenged.
The principle holds for all living entities, but when applied to human beings there is one caveat—that all other entities are genetically programmed to act in a certain way given a certain perception or stimuli, and men have to make a choice among the alternatives.
But in each case, what one ought to do must be derived from specific facts of what they are—their fundamental nature. Following is a rough outline of the logical train of thought by which one can derive the prerequisite conditions and actions for the pursuit of a life in accordance with one's nature:
1) The existence of living organisms is conditional on self-generated action in the face of alternatives.
2) The most fundamental of all alternatives for all living creatures is life or death.
3) Of all living creatures, only man can choose which alternative to pursue.
4) The choice (deliberate or implied in all other choices) to pursue the fundamental alternative of life makes life one's fundamental goal.
5) One's fundamental goal is implicitly the standard of measure for all values one acts to gain or keep in its pursuit.
6) Therefore, that which contributes to one's life (consistent with one's nature, of course—not a mere vegetative existence) is necessarily "the good", and that which detracts from it is "the bad".
7) The long run pursuit of life necessitates a hierarchical code of values in principle (= ethics) to guide (by programming emotions) one's spontaneous choices in any alternative faced, and it requires one to opt for the higher value per that code in lieu of the lower one (= morality of egoism).
8) Man's singular means to fulfill these requirements of his nature in the pursuit of life is by applying the product of his reason to his actions in the production and exchange of values needed to survive and flourish consistent with the nature of the human being he is.
9) The extension of that individual ethic to the social context of an individual living in a society of other volitional (and therefore fallible) men requires that one seek to preserve one's own autonomy over the application of one's own reason to one's own action in the pursuit of one's own life (= freedom from the fallibility of others).
10) The only threat to a man's pursuit of his life in that context would be the initiation or threat of physical force by others to coerce certain choices of action against his will thus diminishing the above defined individual autonomy.
11) The single most fundamental political alternative is therefore not left vs. right, or liberal vs. conservative, but rather: freedom vs. force (= liberty vs. coercion, autonomy vs. servitude).
12) The sole moral requirement for any government of a society of men must therefore be to remove the use or threat of physical force from human interactions and guarantee thereby that all human interrelationships shall be entered into and conducted voluntarily. (= Rand's radical capitalism in which every individual retains his morally justified autonomy).
13) A moral government must therefore guarantee that:
No person shall initiate the use of physical force or threat thereof to take, withhold, damage or destroy any tangible or intangible value of another person who either created it or acquired it in a voluntary exchange, nor impede any other person's non-coercive actions.
