By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sc94597 said:
Mr Khan said:

This is untrue as well: socialism just takes different rights into account. It says that his right to basic housing and basic health care supercedes her right to own a third Mercedes Benz: the money that would have gone to the Benz goes to care for the other person.

It is merely the triumph of economic rights over property rights. At least in its more democratic form.

Those aren't natural rights. They might possibly be contractual obligations, but it would have to be a real contract and not the inconsistent concept of the "social contract." This is of course if we are assuming a deontological ethics position. Most socialists assume consequentialist ethics, and don't need to justify their actions with the concepts of rights or obligations. Which makes them illiberal. 

Right: freedom, like all things, is only good insofar as it is useful.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.