positive rights
positive rights
You cannot have a well-functioning society without positive rights because having a voice is meaningless if no one has to listen. And if no one has to listen you are disenfranchised. And if you are disenfranchised, society doesn't work for you. And if society doesn't work for every individual's best interests, it is not legitimate. And a society that is not legitimate may be legitimately opposed. And that means inherent strife. And that means unsustainable. And that means temporary.
-
Impenitent
- Posts: 4357
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: positive rights
forcing each to be an audience is not freedom of speech
-Imp
-Imp
Re: positive rights
[quote=Impenitent post_id=567626 time=1649614893 user_id=3944]
forcing each to be an audience is not freedom of speech
-Imp
[/quote]
Freedom of speech has a negative and a positive aspect. One side is the right to express yourself. The other is the right of others to hear differing opinions. If someone's voice is silenced, blocked, or ignored, the right to free speech means nothing.
forcing each to be an audience is not freedom of speech
-Imp
[/quote]
Freedom of speech has a negative and a positive aspect. One side is the right to express yourself. The other is the right of others to hear differing opinions. If someone's voice is silenced, blocked, or ignored, the right to free speech means nothing.
-
Impenitent
- Posts: 4357
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:04 pm
Re: positive rights
tell that to twitterAdvocate wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 7:24 pmFreedom of speech has a negative and a positive aspect. One side is the right to express yourself. The other is the right of others to hear differing opinions. If someone's voice is silenced, blocked, or ignored, the right to free speech means nothing.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 7:21 pm forcing each to be an audience is not freedom of speech
-Imp
-Imp
-
henry quirk
- Posts: 14706
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 8:07 pm
- Location: Right here, a little less busy.
Re: positive rights
Impenitent wrote: ↑Mon Apr 11, 2022 12:44 amtell that to twitterAdvocate wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 7:24 pmFreedom of speech has a negative and a positive aspect. One side is the right to express yourself. The other is the right of others to hear differing opinions. If someone's voice is silenced, blocked, or ignored, the right to free speech means nothing.Impenitent wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 7:21 pm forcing each to be an audience is not freedom of speech
-Imp
-Imp
Re: positive rights
you can have a well functioning society that is very powerful without freedom of speech and loaded with disenfranchised. if the disenfranchised become a problem then you put then down by force and make an example for any other rebellion. or you can keep them so poor they have no hope of any thing they might want or need.Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Apr 10, 2022 5:38 pm You cannot have a well-functioning society without positive rights because having a voice is meaningless if no one has to listen. And if no one has to listen you are disenfranchised. And if you are disenfranchised, society doesn't work for you. And if society doesn't work for every individual's best interests, it is not legitimate. And a society that is not legitimate may be legitimately opposed. And that means inherent strife. And that means unsustainable. And that means temporary.
more nations and empires in history and in todays world do it by force and censorship, then what you might understand as nations with rights, which is the delusion of entitlements. should a population enjoy freedoms, it didn't get it because the people were entitled, its because they had come to an agreement and to not only fight for it and win, but defend it like a mad junkyard dog.