Message from @whiic

Discord ID: 544648017672929283


2019-02-11 22:34:36 UTC  

God!

2019-02-11 22:34:37 UTC  

God.

2019-02-11 22:34:39 UTC  

Gouuuuud!

2019-02-11 22:34:46 UTC  

the BIG G-O-D

2019-02-11 22:34:49 UTC  

People will contest if positive rights are a thing at all, often

2019-02-11 22:34:50 UTC  

Gawwwd does not exist. Sorry.

2019-02-11 22:35:04 UTC  

Then use some other higher power.

2019-02-11 22:35:08 UTC  

Doesn’t have to be god.

2019-02-11 22:35:12 UTC  

Does not exist either.

2019-02-11 22:35:17 UTC  

God as the religious one or as a shorthand for nature

2019-02-11 22:35:26 UTC  

A level above government grants them just for being people.

2019-02-11 22:35:29 UTC  

part of the reason they are called 'natural' rights

2019-02-11 22:35:35 UTC  

And even if we assumed it did exist, what are the rights granted by that higher existence?

2019-02-11 22:35:55 UTC  

@H3llbender Which are the natural rights? Which rights did God give us?

2019-02-11 22:35:57 UTC  

But having public schools that are mostly paid for by the government (taxpayers) is a good thing, as long as the government manages its resources well and doesn't tax people like crazy

2019-02-11 22:36:19 UTC  

Property rights are the natural rights.

2019-02-11 22:36:24 UTC  

For example, many (even libertarians) think copyright is natural.

2019-02-11 22:36:30 UTC  

The rights god (or nature) grant is are all the rights we have except the ones we relinquish to government.

2019-02-11 22:36:31 UTC  

Exhaustive list.

2019-02-11 22:36:32 UTC  

An illiterate person is a social outcast, in today's world

2019-02-11 22:36:46 UTC  

I think that's the biggest load of shit I've ever heard, to argue copyright monopoly as a natural right.

2019-02-11 22:36:58 UTC  

Intellectual "property" rights are postive rights.

2019-02-11 22:36:59 UTC  

Because it's "property". Property of an idea. Or word.

2019-02-11 22:37:14 UTC  

I've quite literally never talked to someone who called copyright a natural right

2019-02-11 22:37:18 UTC  

Most ancaps reject IP rights.

2019-02-11 22:37:24 UTC  

The idea is that you have all rights. The only non-rights are anything which infringes the rights of another.

2019-02-11 22:37:29 UTC  

@halfthink But isn't all property kind about positive rights?

2019-02-11 22:37:53 UTC  

Property rights are pretty much "Don't fuck with my shit"

2019-02-11 22:38:00 UTC  

@whiic no, socialised institutions to protect them are though.

2019-02-11 22:38:19 UTC  

How it becomes "my shit" and how one defines "fuck with" are various things

2019-02-11 22:38:35 UTC  

Especially when it comes to common property

2019-02-11 22:38:40 UTC  

Capital is generally required to have copyright. Since you invested something into the idea.

2019-02-11 22:38:46 UTC  

For example, is any land you circle with a fence "your land"?

2019-02-11 22:38:57 UTC  

Under some definitions, yes

2019-02-11 22:39:22 UTC  

If you can defend it, sure. You put money into circling it. Capital.

2019-02-11 22:39:26 UTC  

Capitalism.

2019-02-11 22:39:37 UTC  

"worked" land is activating a part of my memory

2019-02-11 22:40:27 UTC  

@whiic Are you familiar with squatter's rights?

2019-02-11 22:40:32 UTC  

Well, some would fence of more land they can work with, just because it's expected that free land will run out, and being too greedy allows them to sell it with nice profit later, when there's no land to grab onto.

2019-02-11 22:40:42 UTC  

Most libertarians accept the homesteading principle as how unowned property is originally appropriated.

2019-02-11 22:41:24 UTC  

Basically, Molyneux land ownership logic stopped working a few hundred years ago in USA, and was already outdated much earlier in Europe.