NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #20/NN_1992_20.iso/spool/sci/econ/7469

Internet Message Format | 1992-09-14 | 1.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!wupost!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jato!quake!brian
From: [e-mail] (Brian K. Yoder)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Property rights...`
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Sep 92 11:27:25 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Quake Public Access
Lines: 27

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (David S. Masterson) writes:

>Can we agree that the rights of the "individual" are those rights that the
>"majority" has chosen to allow?  The "majority" giveth and the "majority" can
>taketh away...

Absolutely not!!  People have rights because of their nature as rational
beings, and they have those rights whether or not the king, fuhrer,
preident, or majority choose to recognize them or not.

I think a good analogy is that of an automobile engine.  The proper way
for an internal combustion engine to operate is for the spark plug to
fire when the chamber is full of fuel and air, and not for it to fire during
the exhaust cycle.  Of course one could build an engine according to that
other theory, and people could vote on it, and fuhrers could command that
it is the proper way for the engine to function, but that will not change
the fact of the matter which if that such an engine will not run.

Likewise, in social systems, individuals need to be free to think and act
in order to live.  Of course majorities and dictators can deny this and
construct "societies" where this is not possible, but such a society will
not result in prosperity and life, but poverty and death.  What happens
when you build a society on half-right principles (such as the US has now)?
You get a sputtering, failing, underproductive engine that half works.
Sould familiar?

--Brian