3 ms·
And what I'm saying is, it doesn't work to say that only "negative rights" (stuff that doesn't compel anyone to do anything) are human rights. People have a hu
by Frondo 12y ago
And what I'm saying is, it doesn't work to say that only "negative rights" (stuff that doesn't compel anyone to do anything) are human rights.
People have a human right to participate in their government, too. That certainly compels something to exist: a structure in which they can voice their desires in their governance.
It'd take a lot of contortions to work that right into being an ok-to-exist "negative right," and for my part just shows how "negative rights" breaks down really quickly once you get past the really easy stuff like speech.
- mason240 12y agoThe only reason contortions are involved is because you are inserting them to make the issue seem more complicated than it is. >People have a human right to participate in their government, too. Which is a limit on government's power. That is the essence of the entire Enlightenment philosophy that all this is based.
- Frondo 12y agoBut the structures necessary to participate: someone's compelled to do something! Start from nothing, and try to build up a system that at all resembles a democracy, and you're compelling people left and right. Throw in property rights, such as land ownership, and you're compelling people just about 24/7. Just because you like being able to use the violence of the state to throw people off your lawn doesn't mean that it isn't compelling people to be in a certain place.