Abstract
Our thesis in this chapter is that space law should be exactly like proper (e.g. libertarian) law as it applies on our home planet. Unhappily, there is already some burgeoning space law now in operation, and it deviates from law as it ought to apply. How so? For example, the U.N. General Assembly (1962a, XVIII) Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space (Treaty on Principles, 1966) follows the law of the sea treaty averring that the planets are the common heritage of all mankind, whether or not any person, or country, engages in homesteading, the sine qua non of libertarian private property rights. A similar flaw underlies the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (U.N. General Assembly (1962b)).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Seemingly, anyone who writes a book about space and interplanetary relations must think that there is something unique about that arena. And, yes, this is indeed the case in many regards as pretty much the entirety of the present book makes clear. But this does not apply in our view to the law. It should apply in the same manner to any area of our galaxy; on Earth , on Jupiter, and everywhere else. We go further: it should also not be upheld any differently depending upon the historical epoch under consideration. Libertarian law should apply, equally, to the caveman in the past, the modern man at present, and to the spaceman in the future.
- 2.
“Threatening or initiating violence” would include any purposeful and knowing act or threat thereof which is a violation of the rights of the person on the receiving end.
- 3.
Some might even use the term “laudable behavior.” Why would, say, boxing be considered by anyone to be praiseworthy conduct? Prizefighting is after all nothing more that hitting another person in the hopes of personal financial gain: despicable, ought we not say? Yet the prizes come from willing customers who are entertained by the event. Many of the attendees experience a vicarious release of emotion. Otherwise these people might act out their anger in real life were they unable observe this performance in a ring. Still others might enjoy watching the boxers’ skill and strategy. Laudable indeed is the provision of these services. For more on the sometimes-commendable nature of activities widely viewed as depraved, see Block 1976, 2013a, b.
- 4.
- 5.
We use the word “travesty” because the document is essentially dishonest; it almost perfectly expresses a Marxian view of fair use without openly saying so. Furthermore, it fails to note that “States” (in the second paragraph: “Believing…”) are necessarily based on the negation of the NAP . It proclaims as compatible goals, high-sounding principles which are in irreconcilable conflict, to wit “the betterment of mankind” and “the benefit of States.” The list of dishonest usages within this one small passage could go on to fill many pages.
- 6.
For a rather unusual but “peaceful” purpose of moons, see Block 2014a, c. These essays constitute a tongue-in-cheek attack on egalitarianism. Some planets, it turns out, have more than their fair share of moons; others are relatively deprived in this regard. These publications make the case for redistributing moons from the “rich” (when measured in moons) to the “poor.”
- 7.
- 8.
Its formal name is: “Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies .” See on this “Moon Agreement,” 1979. For generally supportive commentary on applying UNCLOS to space see Asamoah 1966; Christol 1980, 1982, 1985; Dembling 1979; Goedhuis 1981; Jasentuliyana 1995; Joyner 1986; Kopal 1968, 1996; Rana 1994; Vlasic 1967.
- 9.
Whether in the seas of the Earth or on heavenly bodies to everyone on Earth, legislation usurping possession of assets remains indefensible.
- 10.
- 11.
Egalitarianism as commonly used is, in itself, false and hypocritical. Additionally, it is materialistic in its focus because it speaks only to the sharing of material assets. Its falsehood stems in part from the common belief of its advocates that they are not materialistic. Meanwhile, it silently posits “an elite corps of impudent snobs” (Spiro Agnew) to control the distribution of wealth while hypocritically garnering power to themselves at the expense of the less fortunate. See on this Rothbard (1971).
- 12.
“Liberalism: b: a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard. c: a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties ”—Merriam Webster online 2013. Those who call themselves “liberal” but who in fact advocate massive government control are at best pseudo-liberal.
- 13.
For an explication and defense of homesteading see Block 1990, 2002a, b; Block and Edelstein 2012; Block and Yeatts 1999–2000; Block vs Epstein 2005 ; Bylund 2005, 2012; Grotius 1625; Hoppe 1993, 2011 ; Kinsella 2003, 2006, 2009 ; Locke 1948 (pp . 17–19), 1955 (chapter 5); Paul 1987; Pufendorf 1673; Rothbard 1973 , p . 32 ; Rozeff 2005; Watner 1982.
- 14.
In popular parlance, “fascism” depicts goose stepping, militarism, destruction of non-Aryans, gays, etc. But from an economics point of view, it indicates something quite different, government regulation and control, not ownership. For example, Krupp , BMW, Mercedes, Stuka, Volkswagen, were all “private” companies under Hitler’s rule. That is, there was a thin veneer of private ownership with regard to them. But they were far from free agents, working in a laissez-faire economy. Rather, the German government highly regulated all of them. Despite protestations to the contrary, functional control implies practical ownership. In short, fascism is virtually identical to socialism, maybe even communism.
- 15.
References
Benson, Bruce L. 1989a. Enforcement of Private Property Rights in Primitive Societies: Law Without Government. The Journal of Libertarian Studies IX (1): 1–26. http://mises.org/journals/jls/9_1/9_1_1.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2016.
———. 1989b. The Spontaneous Evolution of Commercial Law. Southern Economic Journal 55: 644–661.
———. 1990a. Customary Law with Private Means of Resolving Disputes and Dispensing Justice: A Description of a Modern System of Law and Order Without State Coercion. The Journal of Libertarian Studies IX (2): 25–42. http://mises.org/journals/jls/9_2/9_2_2.pdf. Accessed 11 June 2016.
———. 1990b. The Enterprise of Law: Justice Without the State. San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy.
———. 1993. The Impetus for Recognizing Private Property and Adopting Ethical Behavior in a Market Economy: Natural Law, Government Law, or Evolving Self-Interest. Review of Austrian Economics 6 (2): 43–80.
———. 2001. Restitution as an Objective of the Criminal Justice System. The Journal of the James Madison Institute Winter: 17–22.
Block, Walter E. 1976. Defending the Undefendable. Auburn, AL: The Mises Institute.
Block, Walter. 1990. Earning Happiness Through Homesteading Unowned Land: A Comment on ‘Buying Misery with Federal Land’ by Richard Stroup. Journal of Social Political and Economic Studies 15 (2): 237–253.
———. 2002a. Homesteading City Streets; An Exercise in Managerial Theory. Planning and Markets 5 (1): 18–23. http://www-pam.usc.edu/volume5/v5i1a2s1.html; http://www-pam.usc.edu/. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
———. 2002b. On Reparations to Blacks for Slavery. Human Rights Review 3 (4): 53–73.
———. 2013a. There Is No Right to Privacy. July 13. http://archive.lewrockwell.com/2013/07/walter-block/there-is-no-right-to-privacy/. Accessed 20 Apr 2016.
———. 2013b. Defending the Undefendable II: Freedom in All Realms. Terra Libertas Publishing House.
Block, Walter E. 2014a. A Collection of Essays on Libertarian Jurisprudence: Sunshine and Property Rights. Saint Louis University Law Journal 58 (2): 541–547. http://slu.edu/Documents/law/Law%20Journal/Archives/LawJournal58-2/Block_Article.pdf. Accessed 20 Apr 2016.
———. 2014b. Block Discovers New Source of Inequality; Calls for Government Action. June 3. https://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/06/walter-e-block/walter-block-discovers-a-new-source-of-inequality/. Accessed 2 Dec 2015.
Block, Walter E., and Michael R. Edelstein. 2012. Popsicle Sticks and Homesteading Land for Nature Preserves. Romanian Economic and Business Review 7 (1): 7–13. http://www.rebe.rau.ro/REBE%207%201.pdf. Accessed 29 Sep 2016.
Block, Walter and Guillermo Yeatts. 1999–2000. The Economics and Ethics of Land Reform: A Critique of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace’s ‘Toward a Better Distribution of Land: The Challenge of Agrarian Reform’. Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Law 15 (1): 37–69
Boldrin, Michele, and David K. Levine. 2008. Against Intellectual Monopoly. http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm; http://mises.org/store/Against-Intellectual-Monopoly-P552.aspx.
Brisman, Avi. 2011. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Encyclopedia of Global Justice 1103–1104. http://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007%2F978-1-4020-9160-5_661. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Bylund, Per. 2005. Man and Matter: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Justification of Ownership in Land from the Basis of Self-Ownership. Master thesis, Lund University, Spring Semester (June). http://www.uppsatser.se/uppsats/a7eb17de8f/; http://perbylund.com/academics_polsci_msc.pdf; http://www.essays.se/essay/a7eb17de8f/; http://www.lunduniversity.lu.se/o.o.i.s?id=24965&postid=1330482. Accessed 23 Apr 2016
———. 2012. Man and Matter: How the Former Gains Ownership of the Latter. Libertarian Papers 4 (1). http://libertarianpapers.org/articles/2012/lp-4-1-5.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
Christol, Carl Q. 1980. The Common Heritage of Mankind Provision in the 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. The International Lawyer 14 (3): 429–483. Published by: American Bar Association. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40706663?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
———. 1982. The Modern International Law of Outer Space. New York: Pergamon Press.
———. 1985. The Moon Treaty Enters into Force. The American Journal of International Law 79 (1): 163–168. Published by: American Society of International Law. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2202679?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Colombos, Constantine John. 1967. The International Law of the Sea. Longmans.
De Wachter, Joren. 2013. IP Is a Thought Crime. At TEDxLeuven. June 6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=E5BOBs3Nmbw.
Dembling, P. G. 1979. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. In Manual on Space Law, vol. I, compiled and ed. N. Jasentuliyana and R.S.K. Lee. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications.
Fedako, Jim. 2011. Envy, the State, and My Fellow Man. September 28. https://mises.org/library/envy-state-and-my-fellow-man. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Goedhuis, D. 1981. Some Recent Trends in the Interpretation and the Implementation of the Rules of International Space Law Essays in Honor of Oliver J. Lissitzyn. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 19: 213–233.
Gordon, David. 2008. Should the State Regulate Envy? January 15. https://mises.org/library/should-state-regulate-envy. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Griffin, Andrew. 2015. Asteroid Mining Made Legal After Barack Obama Gives US Citizens the Right to Own Parts of Celestial Bodies. November 26. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/asteroid-mining-made-legal-after-barack-obama-gives-us-citizens-the-right-to-own-parts-of-celestial-a6750046.html. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Grotius, Hugo. 1625. Law of War and Peace (De Jure Belli ac Pacis), 3 volumes. Trans. A.C. Campbell, London, 1814.
Hayek, Friedrich A. 1960. The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hazlitt, Henry. 2013. On Appeasing Envy. July 30. https://mises.org/library/appeasing-envy. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Hoppe, Hans-Hermann. 1993. The Economics and Thics of Private Property. Studies in Political Economy and Philosophy. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Huebert, J.H., and Walter E. Block. 2007a. Space Environmentalism, Property Rights, and the Law. Memphis Law Review 37 (2): 281–309. http://www.jhhuebert.com/articles/SpaceEnvironmentalism.pdf. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Huebert, J. H. and Walter E. Block. 2007b. In Defense of Advertising in Space. Proceedings of the 49th Colloquium on the Law of Outer Space: International Institute of Space Law, 479–489. http://adage.com/article?article_id=112401; http://www.jhhuebert.com/articles/In%20Defense%20of%20Advertising%20in%20Space.pdf; http://www.commercialalert.org/issues/culture/outer-space/an-ad-space-odyssey; http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/11/22/space-marketing/. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Huebert, J. H. and Walter E. Block. 2008. “Environmentalists in Outer Space.” The Freeman: Ideas on Liberty, March, Vol. 58, No. 2; http://fee.org/freeman/detail/environmentalists-in-outer-space. Accessed on 12-13-15.
Jasentuliyana, N. 1995. A Survey of Space Law as Developed by the United Nations. In Perspectives on International Law, ed. N. Jasentuliyana. London, The Hague, and Boston: Kluwer Law International.
Joyner, C.C. 1986. Legal Implications of the Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 35 (1): 190–199. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=1507532&fileId=S0020589300044201. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Kinsella, Stephan. 1992. Estoppel: A New Justification for Individual Rights. Reason Papers 17 (Fall): 61.
———. 1995. Legislation and the Discovery of Law in a Free Society. Journal of Libertarian Studies 11 (Summer): 132.
Kinsella, Stephen. 1996. Punishment and Proportionality: The Estoppel Approach. The Journal of Libertarian Studies 12 (1): 51–74. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/12_1/12_1_3.pdf. Accessed 8 June 2016.
Kinsella, Stephan. 1997. A Libertarian Theory of Punishment and Rights. 30 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 607–645.
Kinsella, N. Stephan. 1998–1999. Inalienability and Punishment: A Reply to George Smith. Journal of Libertarian Studies 14 (1): 79–93. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/14_1/14_1_4.pdf. Accessed 8 June 2016.
Kinsella, N. Stephan. 2001. Against Intellectual Property. Journal of Libertarian Studies 15 (2): 1–53. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_1.pdf.
Kinsella, Stephan N. 2003. A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability. Journal of Libertarian Studies 17 (2): 11–37. http://www.mises.org/journals/jls/17_2/17_2_2.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
———. 2006. How We Come to Own Ourselves. September 7. http://www.mises.org/story/2291. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
Kinsella, N. Stephan. 2012. Economic Freedom of the World Rankings and Intellectual Property: The United States’ Bad Ranking Is Even Worse Than Reported. http://c4sif.org/2012/09/economic-freedom-of-the-world-indexes-and-intellectual-property-the-united-states-bad-ranking-is-even-worse-than-reported/.
Klein, Natalie. 2004. Dispute Settlement in the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea. Cambridge Studies in International and Comparative Law. Cambridge University Press.
Klein, Peter J. 2014. Inequality and Envy. May 30. https://mises.org/blog/inequality-and-envy. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Kopal, Vladimir. 1968. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. In Yearbook of Air and Space Law 1966 (Annuaire de droit aérien et spatial), ed. R.H. Mankiewicz. Montreal: McGill University Press.
———. 1996. United Nations and the Progressive Development of International Space Law. In The Finnish Yearbook of International Law, ed. M. Koskenniemi and K. Takamaa, vol. VII. The Hague, Boston, and London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and Kluwer Law International.
Levin, Michael. 1996. Capitalism, Envy, and the Inner City. February 1. https://mises.org/library/capitalism-envy-and-inner-city. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Locke, John. 1948. An Essay Concerning the True Origin, Extent and End of Civil Government. In Social Contract, ed. E. Barker, 17–19. New York: Oxford University Press.
Long, Roderick. 1995. The Libertarian Case Against Intellectual Property Rights. Formulations 3 (1). http://libertariannation.org/a/f31l1.html.
Mathews, Don. 2002. The Price of Envy. April 11. https://mises.org/library/price-envy. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Menell, Peter S. 2007a. Intellectual Property and the Property Rights Movement. Regulation, Fall. http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv30n3/v30n3-6.pdf.
———. 2007b. The Property Rights Movement’s Embrace of Intellectual Property: True Love or Doomed Relationship? Ecology Law Quarterly 34.
Mukherjee, Jay, and Walter E. Block. 2012. Libertarians and the Catholic Church on Intellectual Property Laws. Journal of Political Philosophy Las Torres de Lucca (1): 59–75. http://www.lastorresdelucca.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=93:libertarios-y-la-iglesia-católica-en-las-leyes-de-propiedad-intelectual&Itemid=24&lang=en&Itemid=23.
Navabi, Ash. 2015. To Taylor, Love Freedom. June 23. https://mises.ca/posts/blog/to-taylor-love-freedom/. Accessed 4 Aug 2016.
Olinga, Luc. 2015. New US Space Mining Law to Spark Interplanetary Gold Rush. December 8. http://phys.org/news/2015-12-space-law-interplanetary-gold.html. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Palmer, Tom. 1989. Intellectual Property: A Non-Posnerian Law and Economics Approach. Hamline Law Review 12 (2): 261–304.
Paul, Ellen Frankel. 1987. Property Rights and Eminent Domain. Livingston, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Pufendorf, Samuel. 1673. Natural Law and the Law of Nations (De officio hominis et civis prout ipsi praescribuntur lege naturali).
Rothbard, Murray N. 1982b. Law, Property Rights, and Air Pollution. Cato Journal 2 (1). Reprinted in Economics and the Environment: A Reconciliation, Walter E. Block, ed., Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 1990, pp. 233–279. http://mises.org/story/2120; http://www.mises.org/rothbard/lawproperty.pdf. Accessed 20 Apr 2016.
Rana, Harminderpal Singh. 1994. Common Heritage of Mankind & the Final Frontier: A Revaluation of Values Constituting the International Legal Regime for Outer Space Activities, The Note. Rutgers Law Journal. 26 (1): 225–250.
Reisman, George. 2005. Envy Unleashed at the New York Times. June 6. https://mises.org/library/envy-unleashed-new-york-times. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Rozeff, Michael S. 2005. Original Appropriation and Its Critics. September 1. http://www.lewrockwell.com/rozeff/rozeff18.html. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
Schoeck, Helmut. 1966. Envy: A Theory of Social Behavior. New York: Harcourt Brace and World.
Sennholz, Hans F. 2001. The Envy Tax. August 1. https://mises.org/library/envy-tax. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Stimers, Paul. 2015. One Small Step for Man, One Giant Leap for Law. Wall Street Journal: A15. December 7. http://www.wsj.com/articles/one-small-step-for-man-one-giant-leap-for-law-1449444596. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Stockton, Nick. 2015. Congress Says Yes to Space Mining; No to Rocket Regulations. November 18. http://www.wired.com/2015/11/congress-says-yes-to-space-mining-no-to-rocket-regulations/. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
U.N. General Assembly. 1962a. Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space. http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html. Accessed 8 June 2016.
———. 1962b. Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/ourwork/spacelaw/treaties/introouterspacetreaty.html. Accessed 8 June 2016.
U.S. Commercial Space Launch Competitiveness Act (USCSLCA). 2015. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2262/text. H.R.2262. Accessed 13 Dec 2015.
Vlasic, Ivan A. 1967. The Space Treaty: A Preliminary Evaluation. California Law Review 55 (2): 507–519.
Von Mises, Ludwig. 1981 [1922]. Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. Trans. J. Kahane. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund. http://mises.org/books/socialism/contents.aspx.
Watner, Carl. 1982. The Proprietary Theory of Justice in the Libertarian Tradition. Journal of Libertarian Studies 6 (3–4): 289–316. http://mises.org/journals/jls/6_3/6_3_6.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2016.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nelson, P.L., Block, W.E. (2018). Space Law. In: Space Capitalism. Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74651-7_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74651-7_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-74650-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-74651-7
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)