It still sounds like hand-waving about how compelling people to act a certain isn't a negative right when it's one of the good rights that even libertarians wou

It still sounds like hand-waving about how compelling people to act a certain isn't a negative right when it's one of the good rights that even libertarians would be uncomfortable excluding from the list of human rights. There's absolutely compulsory behavior going on, even if it's the good kind of compulsory behavior (e.g. setting up structures of power that people have access to). Unless you want to redefine "negative rights" down until it's "the ones we like, even though people are compelled to do stuff, like create machinery of democracy and not walk onto property claimed by others". Which, again, ok, if it floats your boat, but it seems more like word games than meaningful discussion about human rights.