4 ms·
The problem is that too many libertarians take the precept that one's body is sacrosanct and extrapolate it to things beyond the body. I agree that one's body b
by eevilspock 11y ago
The problem is that too many libertarians take the precept that one's body is sacrosanct and extrapolate it to things beyond the body. I agree that one's body belongs to oneself and no one else, that it must not be violated by any one or any group, even in the name of a greater good. And I can agree that the fruits of one's labor cannot also be coerced or taken away, as long as "fruits of one's labor" is very strictly and narrowly defined. I agree that everyone has the "right" to be a selfish jerk.
But this does not extend much beyond your body. Certainly not to land.
Land is the fruit of no one's labor. Rather, we are the fruits of it.
- Retra 11y ago"I agree that one's body belongs to oneself and no one else, that it must not be violated by any one or any group, even in the name of a greater good." Your personal autonomy is contingent upon your intent to use that autonomy to promote the common good. Your society, in the name of the greater good, can (and will) take your body from you if you don't use it to employ a minimum amount of consideration for others. And they have every right to. There are no 'innate' rights. They all require justification, even when that justification is both vague and obvious in our current culture.
- eevilspock 11y agoI'm a socialist, but I could never agree with what you just said. You've basically said that society can, for example, force you to work on a farm if others are starving, even if you yourself are content to starve. That's ridiculous.
- Retra 11y agoI've basically described the criminal justice system in every country on the planet.