Difference between revisions of "What Are Rights?"
From Critiques Of Libertarianism
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
[[Category:Rights|025]] | [[Category:Rights|025]] | ||
[[Category:Under Construction]] | [[Category:Under Construction]] | ||
| − | {{DES | des = Rights are a far more complex subject than we usually think. Most people would be surprised at how much that their folk models of rights leave out. Libertarians rely on such simple models because they can lead to the right ideological conclusions. At least | + | {{DES | des = Rights are a far more complex subject than we usually think. Most people would be surprised at how much that their folk models of rights leave out. Libertarians rely on such simple models because they can lead to the right ideological conclusions. At least five fields consider rights: philosophy, law, economics, sociology, and anthropology. A good model would be compatible with all five fields. | show=}} |
== Natural Rights == | == Natural Rights == | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
Every right creates negative duties for all other people, which are often characterized as requiring only "restraint" by the others. As [[Frederic Bastiat]] liked to point out in [[What Is Seen And Unseen]], that overlooks an opportunity cost (for that "restraint"): those other people could benefit from ignoring the duty created by a right. Plenty of people have starved because of the opportunity cost of respecting property rights in land that they could have farmed themselves. | Every right creates negative duties for all other people, which are often characterized as requiring only "restraint" by the others. As [[Frederic Bastiat]] liked to point out in [[What Is Seen And Unseen]], that overlooks an opportunity cost (for that "restraint"): those other people could benefit from ignoring the duty created by a right. Plenty of people have starved because of the opportunity cost of respecting property rights in land that they could have farmed themselves. | ||
== Compound Rights == | == Compound Rights == | ||
| + | Single rights are frequently not very useful. For example, if you have a right to pick a tangerine then you might not have any recourse when somebody else picks the tangerine (unless you also have another right to exclude all others.) There are institutions creating several sets of [http://critiques.us/index.php?title=Bundle_of_Rights bundles of rights] that are commonly useful in society. | ||
| + | === Property === | ||
| + | Property is a specific set of rights that are coercively enforced. See: [http://critiques.us/index.php?title=What_Is_Property%3F#What_are_the_component_rights_of_property.3F What are the component rights of property?] | ||
| + | === Contracts === | ||
| + | Contracts too have bundles of rights such as: | ||
| + | * Rights to purchase a particular product or service | ||
| + | * Rights to resell a product or service | ||
| + | * Rights to be the only seller or buyer | ||
| + | * Rights to delivery and timely payment | ||
| + | * Rights to refunds or repairs | ||
| + | and many others. These rights can vary a great deal and can be explicit in the contract or implicit due to contract law. Enforcement is ultimately through the courts, even if arbitration is specified, because the parties may not abide by the arbitration. | ||
== Positive And Negative Rights? == | == Positive And Negative Rights? == | ||
== Absolute Rights? == | == Absolute Rights? == | ||
| Line 51: | Line 62: | ||
== Collective Rights == | == Collective Rights == | ||
Libertarians ignore a lot of reality to sometimes claim that rights (especially property) are always individual. That's nonsense, usually presented as "Government cannot own things because only individuals can own things": a quick way to "logically" define government as illegitimate. But of course that ignores corporations, partnerships, joint ownership, marriage, governments and much more. Collective rights are common in society and play important functions. | Libertarians ignore a lot of reality to sometimes claim that rights (especially property) are always individual. That's nonsense, usually presented as "Government cannot own things because only individuals can own things": a quick way to "logically" define government as illegitimate. But of course that ignores corporations, partnerships, joint ownership, marriage, governments and much more. Collective rights are common in society and play important functions. | ||
| + | == Individual and Human Rights == | ||
| + | [[Murray Rothbard]] and some other libertarians claim that individual (and human) rights are actually [[Property|property rights]]. Starting from a fantasy [[Natural Rights]] assumption of property , they build a silly argument. Individual Rights are clearly not property rights because they do not have all the subsidiary rights typical of property. This is a classic example of [[Greedy Reductionism|greedy reductionism]]. | ||
== Notes == | == Notes == | ||
==Related Articles== | ==Related Articles== | ||
