Abstract: Adam Blincoe (2018) aims to show that libertarianism, at least in Robert Nozick’s version, is faced with a dilemma: “Either (a) Nozick must admit that taxation for the purpose of guaranteeing a compensatory level of welfare (and not merely for protection from harm) is legitimate or (b) he must admit that his entitlement theory cannot satisfy the Lockean proviso.” I discuss Blincoe’s thought experiment involving “Farmer John,” and take issue with his underlying arguments on a number of grounds. I discuss in turn some problems relating to Nozick’s views on the Lockean proviso, the question of how to define an appropriate welfare benchmark for establishing redistributive obligations, and some issues of those obligations.
Keywords: Robert Nozick, minimal state, Lockean proviso, wealth redistribution, entitlement theory
Download PDF: “Would-Be Farmer John and the Welfare State: A Response to Blincoe”