Pants-of-dog wrote:If we recognise the historical fact that governments can and do use violent force to deprive and enforce property rights, we see that property rights are not some god given objective truth. Instead, they are social constructs. People own land because society agrees they do.
Having said that, let us discuss what you support.
Do you personally think the land we now call the USA should be given back to Indigenous people because the government took their land without consent? Yes or no?
That kind of talk is annoying. You nor I can change what governments have done in the past. If anything you should be supporting The Charter. It is not an attempt to start a new government or even overthrow the existing one. That is why I am supporting it. The government guaranteed we, the people certain Rights and then, through deception and force, they rescinded the guarantee. They duped the people into buying a pig in a poke. Liberals keep using the terminology "social construct
" as if it means something. It doesn't. Socialism is a social construct; communism is a social construct; atheism is a social construct. It's utterly meaningless.
The Declaration of Independence states:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident
IF truth is self evident and we do have these unalienable
Rights, then there should be no problem making good on the guarantee. OTOH, if you are correct and all this Rights talk is lot of cheap B.S. - a "social construct
" as you like to call it, then the government should be compelled to admit it. If we, the people, don't like that outcome there are legal remedies for us... win, lose or draw. The point is, you don't need some half assed document purporting to guarantee Rights and then having a government make excuses for not honoring their part to guarantee said Rights. Did it ever occur to you that if those people pushing hard and demanding satisfaction from the government might evoke the response you long for?
The only thing that is accomplished by not forcing the government to address the fact that they are not upholding their end of the social contract called the Constitution is for people like me to have unrealistic expectations. There is no point in having a document proclaiming all these wonderful Rights I have, only to find out I'm really a push button monkey for some Armani suit wearing tyrant in Washington Wonderland, District of Corruption or maybe some billionaire Canaanite in New York City.
You continue to prod me over my personal views on a thread about The Charter and Proclamation of the Rights of Man
. I have no authority to make my personal views a part of that document nor can I say that others who may sign it have the same views I have. It's simply a demand that the government make good on the guarantees pursuant to the interpretations of the Constitution by the men who ratified it. My personal view is not
incumbent upon The Charter. Understand that going in. The two are not related. I'm not arguing my personal views with you on a thread about The Charter as you would be dishonest and try to claim that since I said something, it is a pretext for others not to support The Charter.
My views may or may not reflect the consensus of those that wrote that document. And when I tell you what the law is or how things came to be, it has NO bearing on what I believe or disbelieve. My private thoughts on the matter are mine and mine alone, not associated with what this OP is about.
Having said that, the founders and framers
justified their actions in terms of Manifest Destiny and their view that since the Indians were not civilized NOR
did they have any concept of property Rights, it was justifiable to appropriate it. Would I have held the same views I have today if I had lived back then? I honestly don't know. What I do know are facts. The facts are that the over-all view was that the colonists were the Israelites of the Bible; America was the New Jerusalem; Manifest Destiny was the future. We go back to the Declaration of Independence. Truth is supposed to be self evident. Well, the colonists and early Americans were blessed in proportion to their obedience to God. When America ceased being governed by biblical principles, they were punished with curses as per the Holy Writ. That is an observation, not
As someone who has lived in slavery and had it as bad as any slave, there is not a snowball's chance in HELL that I would forfeit my God given, unalienable
Rights. Those are my words about me, not what I expect from others. I won't give up the Right to keep and bear Arms lest we become subjects to a tyrannical master. Nobody is going to tell me what religion I can or cannot adopt. If the need arises that I should use the prohibited words that whites can't say without it being a felony, I would defend myself against an unlawful arrest because America was founded on the presupposition
that all men have unalienable
Rights. You can call presuppositional Rights
that have proven to be God given social constructs
or whatever floats your boat. Their origin has been proven to me to my satisfaction. Therefore, I will support them. If you don't, more power to you. Benjamin Franklin said that America would ultimately be governed by God or by tyrants. I think that, in the meantime, we should live and let live and work toward unalienable
Rights. It's a journey, NOT a destination.