Friendica Social Network

Robert J. Berger

2 weeks ago • •

Robert J. Berger
2 weeks ago • •

“Conflict is a reliable way to know whether or not you're a leftist. As Steven Brust says, the way to distinguish a leftist is to ask "What's more important, human rights, or property rights?" If you answer "Property rights *are* human right," you're not a leftist. Leftists don't necessarily oppose all property rights - they just think they're less important than human rights.”
- @pluralistic

“#Capitalists Hate #Capitalism”

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/18/in-extremis-veritas/

Pluralistic: Podcasting “Capitalists Hate Capitalism” (18 Apr 2024) – Pluralistic: Daily links from Cory Doctorow

^{pluralistic.net}

in reply to Robert J. Berger

M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Robert J. Berger • 2 weeks ago • •

And I disagree with this. When police destroy homeless people's tents, they're violating their human rights.

in reply to M.S. Bellows, Jr.

Cory Doctorow

in reply to M.S. Bellows, Jr. • 2 weeks ago • •

@msbellows You are not disagreeing; rather, you're commenting without following the link, whereupon you would have discovered that this is in no way incompatible with the thesis.

Think of conflicts between property rights and human rights: the grocer who deliberately renders leftover food inedible before putting it in the dumpster to ensure that hungry people can't eat it, or the landlord who keeps an apartment empty while a homeless person freezes to death on its doorstep. You don't have to say "No one can own food or a home" to say, "in these cases, property rights are interfering with human rights, so they should be overridden." For leftists property rights can be a means to human rights (like revolutionary land reformers who give peasants title to the lands they work), but where property rights interfere with human rights, they are set aside.

@M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Cory Doctorow

M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Cory Doctorow • 2 weeks ago • •

Isn't that just a "no true Scotsman" qualification, though?

in reply to M.S. Bellows, Jr.

Cory Doctorow

in reply to M.S. Bellows, Jr. • 2 weeks ago • •

@msbellows
No.

It's the difference between property rights as an instrument for achieving human rights and property rights *as* a human right.

The property right to be secure in your home - whether that's an encampment or a luxury condo - delivers the human right of shelter.

But when the fire department needs to drag its hoses through your home, your property right is sidelined to serve others' human right not to burn to death.

@M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Cory Doctorow

M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Cory Doctorow • 2 weeks ago • •

I still disagree, though, simply because there's doesn't appear to be an invite bright line. Does taking someone's yacht violate a "human right"? I'm inclined to say no. Is taking away a scared child's familiar teddy bear? Yes.

in reply to M.S. Bellows, Jr.

Cory Doctorow

in reply to M.S. Bellows, Jr. • 2 weeks ago • •

@msbellows This is still fully compatible.

Is it OK to take away a scared child's familiar teddy bear if it's carrying a contagion that threatens the health of everyone else, even if that child is immune?

Yes. Property rights are sometimes a means to achieve human rights, but property rights aren't human rights.

@M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Cory Doctorow

M.S. Bellows, Jr.

in reply to Cory Doctorow • 2 weeks ago • •

And the same can be said of free speech, and religious practice, and free travel, and marriage choice, and every other human right. All can be constrained when they come into conflict with another right.

in reply to Robert J. Berger

CassandraVert

in reply to Robert J. Berger • 1 week ago • •

I got excused from a jury panel because I said I would not convict a homeless person (the defendant) for existing somewhere that happened to be owned by someone else (trespassing).

⇧