Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Politics In General libertarians = right wing anarchists

My pig farm produces odors in the air in accordance with natural laws. The pigs naturally poop, and gravity (a natural law) makes it flow into the stream on my property.

Naturally, you are free to buy a suitable water filter and either get used to the smell, buy a mask or move away. You may not restrict my right to farm pigs, if that is what I choose to do with my property. I was here first, I got the land from my father who got it from his father, who got it from his father, who stole it from the Indians.

Au contraire, the EPA will be on you faster than AT & T can give a customer's information out to the Bush Administration.

Rick, I think that the point here is 'what do you do in a world that does not have an EPA?'

If you review what I wrote you will see I wrote that the government has as a responsibility, " to secure and to protect the natural rights of the individual. This does not mean that the laws would reflect all the same laws that are in effect today, because the basic premise within a libertarian society is neither the state nor the individual can aggress against another except to defend against a physical attack."

I am not sure why you would think that there could not be a judiciary in a libertarian-oriented society (we are not speaking of anarcho-capitalism here). The judiciary as well as police would be a part of protecting the natural rights of the citizen. I don't see an issue, here.
Yours,
Issodhos

I addressed this earlier, Schlack, when I wrote:

"The formulating and formalizing of the political philosophy of Individualism based on the theory of natural Rights which were derived from the study of the nature of man emerged during the Enlightenment beginning in the 17th century. This is why I have referred to the philosophy of Individualism as the new kid on the block.

The concept of Man’s natural Rights (including property Rights) flow from Man’s rational mind as easily and as naturally as water from an artesian well. The man who builds a barn knows naturally that it is morally his to do with as he pleases. A man who exchanges something of value for the barn another man built knows naturally that it is morally his to do with as he pleases. So too does a man who exchanges something of value for a business. He knows naturally that it is his to do with as he so desires.

How much more difficult it is to convince a man that what he creates or obtains is not really his. To dispossess him of such a natural thought a complex and convoluted theory of “non-ownership” and “fallacy of property” must be developed and then, through an un-natural and tortured reification, inculcated into his worldview.

In terms of "natural Rights" "natural" refers to the nature of man -- not other animals, or how other animals organize, act, or react, nor even how man reacts to nature's forces. For example, it is the nature of man to be intellectually inquisitive, gregarious, and communicative of ideas. This being a part of the integral nature of man, he must be free to express himself and his ideas to others. Hence the natural basis for Freedom of Speech (from within man)."


The right to life is indeed a natural right in that it cannot be taken from you by another except in self-defense. But, you do not have a natural right to water, food, and shelter because a natural right cannot require that another be obligated to provide it for you if you cannot do so or you wish not to. Note, however, that this does not restrict a people from voluntary action in assisting someone in need of these necessities of life.
Yours,
Issodhos

It will feel so much better to be sued by tree-hugging libertarians who want to dictate how loud I can play my music, how smelly my pigs can make the down wind air, and whine to the authorities that the water in the stream is a little deadly.

I'll feel so free!

You may see a big difference in a libertarian zoning board trampling my rights and a libertarian cop taser-ing me and a libertarian IRS collecting my money to pay for all this libertarian natural "rights protecting."

I don't
Reminds me of Bush and his 'dictatorship" vision.
It's fine as long as he gets to be the dictator.

Since you won't say who gets to pick these thugs, I'll assume it's a libertarian collective of busy-body do-gooders.

'Meet the new boss....'

Issodhos, the theory of natural rights is circular logic -- they exist because when I look for them I find them. I suggest your read of human nature is too limited and fails to include the many examples of it being "natural" for there to be an overriding value to community and common ownership.

The "nature" of which you speak is primarily a philosophy born in the ancient Middle East and refined in the West. I easily understand the argument for this style of rights, I simply am unwilling to agree that it is more than a well reasoned claim that finds its ultimate validation within itself -- alone.

is not inaction a choice?

if you are able and choose not to assist, you have acted, and by so acting you have infringed upon the right to life.

the man who has nor water or food or breathable air cannot do any of these things

There is a saying that you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink. Having worked awhile in an earlier life as a farm hand, I can assure you this is usually correct. Being one who has little interest in making anyone do anything, I am quite happy to leave the horse to drink or not drink and to leave you to engage in bad faith argument or not.:-)
Yours,
Issodhos