thats why rights arent the same everywhere

No government don't grant rights

Only protect them or take them away

That's the whole concept of rights

you have property rights that are given to you by the government sure

Human rights at least

whats the difference between not taking away rights and granting them?

Protected by the government, not given by it

There’s a big difference

but your idea of rights that exist outside of law seems so arbitrary

why do you have some sort of right, existing outside of laws, to excercise power over things

and what is the character of this right and why

What's the diffrence between giving you a couch and protecting a couch you already have from being stolen?

please eleborate cause i cant tell if my rights are given to me or are just not being taken away

like do you believe you have some sort of natural right that transcends law to own land?

@Muffin Man

yes

It's not natural, it's a principal. It's simply the most practical and efficent to run a society

wait so do you think land ownership is different from other kinds of ownership or do you think this for all forms of ownership

Why do you think it should be diffrent?

Expecting logic from a commie

Have fun wasting your time

so is your argument that these "rights" that transcend law are just principles that are the most efficient way to run a society

@Fulcrum010 yep

They don't "transcend" law. The reason laws exist in the first place in to protect these rights

but what is the basis for these rights

you can't give me a straight answer

Again, rights are just concept we agreed that everyone deserves. Basically any form of freedom that doesn't hurt anyone else

dae workers seize the means of production

Rights are things we are born with and government is there to protect

so what makes the concept of us agreeing that the ability to own land is a right different from us agreeing to the right for employees to excercise workplace democracy

one is theft

circular logic

The company is privately owned. If the ones who owns it wants to run it as a democracy, I have no objections

yeah but what if we don't agree that firms should be privately owned

cry harder then

They will be privately owned, get over it

If it already belongs to someone, the state has no authority to take it away. That's why

why

The one who owns it either built it himself or bought it