Negative vs positive rights Negative Protections versus interference Positive Entitlements education and healthcare Libertinism Sole purpose of the government is to protect the citizens rights The government is a protector of life liberty and prosperity I would rather di then be a slave The only way government can interfere is for realization against those who have infringed rights Pressure point of libertarianism Why should we have the right to property without other rights would be hard to satisfy Right to life may be endangered if you don t have property With out the right to positive rights then the negative rights will be harder to satisfy Without education and medical care you might be deprived of the way you live If you take government intervention away then the economy will flourish Nielsen on economic justice HOSPERS P1 Autonomy is good in itself P2 Fro mP1 Interference with autonomy unless it is to protect some one else s automy is wrong P3 from P2 Government taxing us for anything but police and defense is impermissible intervention with our autonomy Nelson says there are 2 ways to view p1 In deontological manner and in a consequentialist manner If in a deontological manner then we should never interfere with autonomy unless there is some higher good Such higher good may be the right to life AS long as Hospers hasn t shown that there is higher good than autonomy But if there is like the right to life then there can be scenarios then there is a right to protect someone s life Objection 2 If in a consequentialist manner then try to maximize autonomy in the world even if that results in interfering with people s individual autonomy So if we read p1 in a consequentialist manner then we should maximize autonomy But then p2 doesn t follow from p1 Socialism is awesome WE are not going to use the word socialism as it is often used today a word denoting a social state od affairs where everyone is equally stupid unmotivated and obligated to keep everyone else at the same level economical intellectual That is not socialism Characteristics of socialism public ownership Public ownership of productive property note that private property is not seized by the state That the ownership is public means just that It does not mean that everyone holds an equal stake in companies I might hold 80 and my two co workers might own 10 each But each of us has an equal say in how the company works Classes of society In capitalism there are two classes owners and workers Socialism no classes because there are only owners to the places they work Non interference is the only valuable to the extent that it aids our autonomy If you don t have the ability to pursue any meaningful goals because of lack of access to resources the fact that no one interferes doesn t matter Moral Equality In capitalism more equality is unattainable Any economic system that does a better job in defending freedom autonomy democracy and moral quality than another system is more than just than that system Problems Innovation Doesn t socialism stifle innovation
View Full Document
Unlocking...