The Politics of Human Interaction
“The concept of individual rights is so prodigious a feat of political thinking that few men grasp it fully—and two hundred years have not been enough for other countries to understand it. But this is the concept to which we owe our lives—the concept which made it possible for us to bring into reality everything of value that any of us did or will achieve or experience.” - Ayn Rand, Man's Rights
Human Rights vs. Man's Law
Rights in a legal context are based on laws subjectively created by man and should not be confused with the ethical concept of human rights; a concept objectively deduced from a human being’s nature to an independent, absolute reality. Legal rights can, and in a moral society, should be assessed in relation to natural human rights.
When considering any question of what should or should not be legal, one must first consider the proper role of force in a social context. By definition law is force; whether or not the people living under the law have a voice in the legislative process is irrelevant to the fact of this concept. If one’s aim is to defend a code of law compatible with human rights, one must evaluate the appropriate role of force in relation to human association.
In a social context, rights pertain to freedom of action. Every person has a right to his or her own life. A right is freedom to act; freedom from coercion. A right is not freedom to have any object unearned, nor is it a positive obligation or infringement on the rights of another. Since individual effort is required to sustain life, a right to life necessitates individual freedom to voluntarily act on one’s own judgment and choices and to keep and dispose of the products of one’s individual physical and mental labor.
Self-defense is a necessary corollary to the right to life. Every person has the right to defend his or her life, liberty, and justly earned property. Just as the individual has the right to defend his or her own life, people have the right to voluntarily organize in order to protect their rights. The objective use of force to protect individuals against the initiation of force by aggressors is the only role of such a ‘protective institution’ in a society that consistently upholds the principle of human rights. Objective laws compatible with human rights are the only just laws, and the defense of individual rights is the fundamental principle of a proper political system.
The rational means by which to determine if an action should be deterred by lawful force is to assess the action in terms of whether or not the action violates the rights of another. Repression of actions which cause no harm to others--whether these actions are subjectively considered "moral" or "immoral"—constitutes a violation of human rights and is incompatible with the principles of a free society.
A $ A
When considering any question of what should or should not be legal, one must first consider the proper role of force in a social context. By definition law is force; whether or not the people living under the law have a voice in the legislative process is irrelevant to the fact of this concept. If one’s aim is to defend a code of law compatible with human rights, one must evaluate the appropriate role of force in relation to human association.
In a social context, rights pertain to freedom of action. Every person has a right to his or her own life. A right is freedom to act; freedom from coercion. A right is not freedom to have any object unearned, nor is it a positive obligation or infringement on the rights of another. Since individual effort is required to sustain life, a right to life necessitates individual freedom to voluntarily act on one’s own judgment and choices and to keep and dispose of the products of one’s individual physical and mental labor.
Self-defense is a necessary corollary to the right to life. Every person has the right to defend his or her life, liberty, and justly earned property. Just as the individual has the right to defend his or her own life, people have the right to voluntarily organize in order to protect their rights. The objective use of force to protect individuals against the initiation of force by aggressors is the only role of such a ‘protective institution’ in a society that consistently upholds the principle of human rights. Objective laws compatible with human rights are the only just laws, and the defense of individual rights is the fundamental principle of a proper political system.
The rational means by which to determine if an action should be deterred by lawful force is to assess the action in terms of whether or not the action violates the rights of another. Repression of actions which cause no harm to others--whether these actions are subjectively considered "moral" or "immoral"—constitutes a violation of human rights and is incompatible with the principles of a free society.
A $ A
A succinct justification for liberty:
“One has to begin with a view of reality as comprehensible, and of man as a rational being who relies upon reason as his sole means of valid knowledge and as his basic tool of survival. One must then identify man’s life as the proper standard of value, and morality as the principles defining the actions necessary to maintain man’s life. Since life is sustained through thought and action, one then concludes that the individual must have the right to think and to act, and to keep the product of that thinking and acting – which means: the right to life, liberty, and property. Because the initiation of force is the means by which a mind is paralyzed, such force is evil. Because force is the means by which one’s rights are violated, it must be outlawed. Thus the conclusion that liberty is a fundamental social good.” - Peter Schwartz
“One has to begin with a view of reality as comprehensible, and of man as a rational being who relies upon reason as his sole means of valid knowledge and as his basic tool of survival. One must then identify man’s life as the proper standard of value, and morality as the principles defining the actions necessary to maintain man’s life. Since life is sustained through thought and action, one then concludes that the individual must have the right to think and to act, and to keep the product of that thinking and acting – which means: the right to life, liberty, and property. Because the initiation of force is the means by which a mind is paralyzed, such force is evil. Because force is the means by which one’s rights are violated, it must be outlawed. Thus the conclusion that liberty is a fundamental social good.” - Peter Schwartz
|
Additional Suggested Material:
|
 |
“You may take it as a general rule: whenever an issue leads to an unresolvable conflict, you will find, at its root, the violation of someone’s rights.” – Ayn Rand
"Left and Right" - 40 Years Later
In this lecture, Roderick T. Long presents a comparison of essays written by Murray Rothbard and Herbert Spencer to explain the historical & ideological roots of the political Left and Right. Long explains how the Left and Right have evolved over the last century and discusses the internal Libertarian debate regarding forming alliances with the Left and/or the Right.
'How America Can Be Saved' by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
This is a remarkable speech from one of the greatest minds of our time. Professor Hans-Hermann Hoppe discusses how America can be saved by 1) providing a diagnosis of what has happened in the 20th Century, 2) defining our goal, and 3) outlining a strategy of getting to where we want to go. This audio can also be downloaded for free at mises.org. Well worth the hour. A++
Other excellent lectures on the nature of politics by Hans-Hermann Hoppe include:
Questions? Comments? Feedback? Submit your thoughts here.