Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (103346)	6/28/2003 11:33:22 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Maybe better to go with freedom of expression as defining right, in place of right to property .... for a couple of reasons at least - one, with property you're going up right off against all the tired old -isms, property has been fought about by infinite longwinded demagogues, shades of Proudhon, too much contentious baggage maybe .... two, property brings into it the question of how much you start from a base that uses all the old kleptocratic acquisition of the past ... pretty hard to decide what is just in land tenure in many places, for instance, thinking here of much of these Americas, it's not like all current holders got theirs out of free enterprise and productive work Anyway, it can be argued that your core property is your mind, and that your right to it depends on its inalienable right to receive and transmit without hindrance, so then you're back to freedom of expression ... both ways, incoming and outgoing, in all media, 'the state shall make no law ...' Cubanos are not permitted on this net, either to lurk freely or to post, even to receive uncensored email, therefore they are not free .... there's another advantage to using expression as defining freedom, it is a quick and easy measure - when you see posters from a place typing at you, it's free, they're in [China's still out by this standard] ..... and they'll get other freedoms once they've hollered enough, heh heh

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (103346)	6/28/2003 11:50:33 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

It starts with property rights. It ends with property rights. You must be a classical liberal then.. :0) Because most liberals I'm acquainted with feel little remorse in having the government expropriate more and more private property to run their governmental programs (normally aimed at re-distributing wealth to less fortunate). Building from that, a reconstituted UN would include only those countries which can demonstrate that We the Sheeple are the rulers of their country. I believe I have made the same recommendation in prior posts. However, I must admit that I am curious as to why New Zealand's government would be considered ineligible. Hawk