4 ms·

None of their leverage hinges on laws. Laws are a caching layer for rights, which are inalienable. Their leverage hinges on a capacity to organize one another a

by rexpop 8y ago

None of their leverage hinges on laws. Laws are a caching layer for rights, which are inalienable. Their leverage hinges on a capacity to organize one another and express their interests.

CryptoPunk 8y ago
Laws are most certainly not always manifestations of inalienable rights. They often violate inalienable rights, and are based on manipulating public opinion with propaganda and ideology. Their position as the lens through which the public perceives the wider world gives them an extraordinary opportunity to manipulate public opinion to support social narratives and laws that benefit people in their circumstances.
umanwizard 8y ago
> rights, which are inalienable Says who?
- briandear 8y ago
  John Locke.
  - pmyteh 8y ago
    His argument for why they're inalienable is completely dependent on the existence of (a particular conception of) God. I found reading the Second Treatise of Government an eye-opening experience for this reason. If we want an argument for the inalienability of natural/human rights that works in a society with religious pluralism, I fear we'll need to look again.
    - User23 8y ago
      This is a fundamental ethical problem. Science and logic can't demonstrate that rape and murder, just to give a couple examples, are wrong. In fact science tells us that rape and murder are hunky-dory if they increase biological fitness. Any meaningful system of ethics is characteristically normative, which means it rests on authority; divine authority is the highest form of authority that can be thought of.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Laws are a caching layer for rights No, they aren't. Law sometimes expresses either a consensus view or a compromise between views of rights, sometimes it deals with things at a level only distantly related to rights. > which are inalienable. Even in most conceptions of rights that include some inalienable rights, not all rights are inalienable.
User23 8y ago
There is simple dichotomy here. In the Anglo-American tradition, laws are a check on the power of government. Everywhere else, they are a tool of government power. The Anglo-American tradition observably holds little sway in modern US jurisprudence though.

by rexpop 8y ago

None of their leverage hinges on laws. Laws are a caching layer for rights, which are inalienable. Their leverage hinges on a capacity to organize one another and express their interests.

CryptoPunk 8y ago

Laws are most certainly not always manifestations of inalienable rights. They often violate inalienable rights, and are based on manipulating public opinion with propaganda and ideology. Their position as the lens through which the public perceives the wider world gives them an extraordinary opportunity to manipulate public opinion to support social narratives and laws that benefit people in their circumstances.

umanwizard 8y ago

> rights, which are inalienable Says who?

briandear 8y ago
John Locke.
- pmyteh 8y ago
  His argument for why they're inalienable is completely dependent on the existence of (a particular conception of) God. I found reading the Second Treatise of Government an eye-opening experience for this reason. If we want an argument for the inalienability of natural/human rights that works in a society with religious pluralism, I fear we'll need to look again.
  - User23 8y ago
    This is a fundamental ethical problem. Science and logic can't demonstrate that rape and murder, just to give a couple examples, are wrong. In fact science tells us that rape and murder are hunky-dory if they increase biological fitness. Any meaningful system of ethics is characteristically normative, which means it rests on authority; divine authority is the highest form of authority that can be thought of.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Laws are a caching layer for rights No, they aren't. Law sometimes expresses either a consensus view or a compromise between views of rights, sometimes it deals with things at a level only distantly related to rights. > which are inalienable. Even in most conceptions of rights that include some inalienable rights, not all rights are inalienable.

User23 8y ago

There is simple dichotomy here. In the Anglo-American tradition, laws are a check on the power of government. Everywhere else, they are a tool of government power. The Anglo-American tradition observably holds little sway in modern US jurisprudence though.