Obres wrote:
The philosophy of libertarians is the same as the philosophy of every other political party: "I want the rights that are important to ME". Libertarians just have a more eclectic collection of rights they value.
I'd generally call the libertarians less eclectic, as they often tend to invoke simple foundations from which their philosophy emerges, and they actually do seem somewhat driven by their philosophy.
Quote:
That being said, what constitutes a right anyway? Should adequate health care be a right regardless of financial situation? We do have that in the US actually, but only in some ("emergency") situations. What about cheap energy? The OP wanted to keep trucks and SUVs, and was against taxes and regulations. This all comes back to oil, so my question is: do we have a right to affordable energy, and at what price? 2 dollars a gallon for gas? 3 dollars? Market price? What's market price then, for a commodity that's heavily influenced by international politics and an easily influenced market? Is any "market price" OK as long as the government doesn't tax it? Is it OK to pay $50/gallon for gas if we shut down relations with the middle east and supplies dwindle and the price skyrockets, so long as the government doesn't restrict or tax our "right" to it? Or is the government required to take steps to ensure an affordable supply of energy? How does this compare to the government taking steps to ensure an affordable supply of energy, then taxing gas because hey, don't they need funding to continue operating so we can continue to obtain affordable gas? What about my right to listen to loud music? What about my right to listen to loud music at 3 AM? What about my neighbor's right to uninterrupted sleep? The problem with rights is that no matter how much you examine them or philosophize, they always end up being "what's important to ME". The best we can hope for is to endorse a set of rights that aren't self-contradictory, ie. you can't have the right to blast music at 3 AM, and also the right to uninterrupted sleep, choose one.
To a person who actually believes in rights, there is an aspect to the universe where rights are "natural" and derived from the moral nature of man. "Rights" is often a moral term when speaking abstractly.
It seems to me that the last issue with the loud music is likely a property rights issue, because the problem only exists due to the invasion of sound waves into the property of another person and the damages caused by that. Many of the rest are more like issues of positive rights(perhaps a term on questionable grounds, but the idea refers to Isaiah Berlin's two conceptions of rights, where one is the right to something, and the other is the right not to have something done to you)
26 Jun 2009, 9:58 pm
