3 ms·
I'm not sure that's necessary. Can you link on a resource that says positive rights always result in the violation of someone's negative rights? I guess the n
by nopassrecover 17y ago
I'm not sure that's necessary. Can you link on a resource that says positive rights always result in the violation of someone's negative rights? I guess the negative right of property would be violated by the tax cost of the internet.
- frig 17y agoThe positive/negative rights thing is basically the libertarians adopting a simplified and less-nuanced reading of Isaiah Berlin's famous essay, "Two Concepts of Liberty" http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/papers/twoconcepts.pdf http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/papers/twoconcepts.pd... It's better to go to the originals on things like this then to read what they've become in the political folk mythology on the internets.
- byrneseyeview 17y agoThe only exception would be a positive right to something previously unowned. For example, you could have a right to own any island you discover, without violating someone else's preexisting claim. But if you have a right to be fed, it violates someone else's right to the food they own; if you have a right to medical care, nurses and doctors don't own their own time, etc.
- nopassrecover 17y agoThis point seems misguided. Your right to medical care doesn't force nurses and doctors to become nurses and doctors - on the contrary it enables their right to a job if that is their chosen career path.