So that our children or grandchildren can consume them?

"do you hire calligraphers to make your grocery list for you?"

yeah i do actually how'd you know?

Parenthetically, rlumley said,
"Even though I hate democracy..."

Well, let's hope there are never a majority of people like you.

:P

@ Thucydides:

Go to a mall. Sit on a bench. Watch the people around you. Do you really want them in control of your government?

The problem of a democracy is the tyranny of an uneducated majority - 51% of people can do anything they want to to the other 49%. Which is why we have rights. But it's getting to the point that it doesn't seem we have rights anymore either...

@ rlumley:

The problem is, who decides what rights you should have? What gives them the authority to decide you DO have a right to X, but DO NOT have a right to Y? Should a democratic government make these decisions? You seem to think not. So who should?

I should make them. I should make all decisions for myself.

But as to the ideal government, which is a semi-necessary evil, I think it would be somewhere close to an oligarchy that governs with extreme respect to personal freedoms.

And to answer your question: A man has a right to do anything that does not affect others in a material way. That's a good place to start, but there may be some exceptions. Can't think of any off the top of my head, but there could be some.

@ rlumley: "I should make them. I should make all decisions for myself."

YOU should decide what rights YOU have? You do realise that that's completely unworkable?

Rights create corresponding duties. For example, assuming I have a right not to be tortured, this means that everyone else has a duty not to torture me. If it is established that I have a right to clean, safe drinking water, then whoever is responsible for the water supply has a duty towards me, to ensure that the water is clean and safe. And so on.

If YOU decide what your rights are, then you are imposing duties on others without their consent. For basic rights like the right not to be tortured, which I just mentioned, this is not too problematic. But what if you decide you have the right to walk around in public in the nude? If this right is valid, then everyone else has a duty to allow you to go around naked. Some people may object to this - they may consider your behaviour obscene, and may feel that they have a right not to be subjected to your obscene behaviour. Both sides claim a right in this case, but only one side's right can be upheld.

So you can't just say "I should make all decisions for myself" when it comes to deciding what rights everyone has. This leads to chaos where everyone claims various different "rights", but no-one's right claims can be legitimately upheld. In this scenario, your "rights" are meaninless.

This is one of the many reasons we need a legal system and an organised government to administer it.

*meaningless, not "meaninless" sorry.

Sorry, I misinterpreted you. Rereading your post, I'm not sure why. I contradicted myself because of my misunderstanding.

I was talking about decisions... I'm not really sure why. Read the second part of my question - that's answering what you were actually asking...

Ok rlumley - thanks for the clarification.

"you're right to swing your fist, ends at the tip of my nose"

And rlumley is right as far as democracy goes. the tyranny of the majority

Wow... Maybe I need to rethink that. Sicarius and I agree on something? That's more shocking than Jamiet and I's agreement.

it's not really. Anarchists actually have quite a bit in common with old school conservatives. DIY ethic, community orientation, the desire to be "left alone" (i.e. to be able to do as you please on say, your own property/communtiy) there are a lot of parallels, it just goes unnoticed by most, usually because of superficial reasons.

usually but not always. i.e. racism, hierarchy sexism etc.

Did you really bump this? It had died...

that fact this thread is still alive is a testament to Beck's nuttyness.

Except we haven't talked about Beck in like 200 posts?

yeah... because he's THAT nutty =P