Dear Friends,
It seems to me, many people believe that food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare are human rights. While it is absolutely a fundamental human right to have access to them, it is not a right to have someone else pay for them, unless the payers so will it i.e. alms. The difference is not only important because it has implications for meeting the needs of people but it has even deeper implications for liberty in a society.
The right to access all the things that are necessary for life, is fundamental in that, for one thing, if anyone is denied access to them, it is always for a wicked purpose. From racism or religious intolerance to mere larceny it is incompatible with a civilized society. If a person who has every history of careful use and responsible citizenry tries to purchase a good, product, service or rental, in a true capitalist society, one that values the rights of Man, they must be serviced. There can be no other way in a civilized society. Civilization being the operative concept in any true consideration of our fundamental human rights, ie whether a “right” is fundamental or serves a nefarious purpose.
Take the generally recognized right to freedom of religion. It is a right that need not conflict with anyone else’s liberty or actions. If a group gathers for mass they do so as a group. No one is forced to attend, (accept for a few impish kids). No person who is not of that flock is forced to pay for the heat, water, air-conditioning or priestly pay. Those that follow pay and society is enriched at their expense.
Take the “right” to food. The person who holds up his fist and demands others pay for his food or he will muster an army and take what is “rightfully” his is a criminal (unless the food was taken from him or her in the first place, but that is a different blog…). Demanding then taking for his pleasure what is not his makes him no different than Jeffrey Dahmer. There is no difference between a single robber in an alley putting a gun to your back and taking your wallet, a mob beating you because you are, a Jew, Black, White, Asian, a capitalist, a communist or a Presbyterian, an army confiscating your food, or a tyrant simply taking your home. As Tzu Ssu basically said, for a person to see a black dot and call it black but to see many black dots and call them white, well, that person’s eyes must be aflutter.
Take the generally recognized Right of freedom of speech. It demands nothing of anyone else. A flyer I post may be read, or not, at the will of the passersby. I can speak to my friends of whatever we feel like without imposing on anyone else. If our voices are too high and we are asked we can lower them to keep within the civilized norm. The Right to freedom of speech does not require the government to rifle through my things looking for anything I may have hidden from them. Freedom of speech actually requires the government to stifle it’s predilection to impose on it’s citizens.
Take the “right” of clothing. In order to have all people clothed in a society requires, as a prerequisite, a means to provide the clothing, for those that will divert that income to fun instead of needs, letting the system intercede to cloth them at the level that is appropriate for the society in which they live. This necessitates whatever system that is set up to gather substantial income, to pick up the slack for people who will see that it is in their self interest, to have others pay for their necessities and use their income for frivolity. Substantial Income, no matter the source, comes from the common font.
The common font is the national money supply. No matter whom the money the common supply of money for investment, demand or new supply cannot be made if it is taken from the common font. Someone might say, “the money is put back in in the purchasing of garments and the other money is used to promote a lighthearted lifestyle.” – That is absolutely true, that the money is put back in purchasing garments, but, the money is not best spent on allowing people to divert income from necessities, to enjoyment. It is better invested in efficient demand, investment or new supply. Money that is probably better, (more efficiently) spent is diverted to the egoist.
The efficiency of a dollar spent in an economy is important to the increasing standard of living. The less efficient a dollar is spent the less it improves GDP. If a dollar is sufficiently misspent it actually diminishes GDP. A dollar spent buying a slave is an example of money spent that actually diminishes GDP. Money spent to purchase the means of production is generally the most efficient money spent. Money spent to purchase the production of the machine earlier purchased is well spent in terms of efficiency, (as long as it meets an actual need).
It seems clear that what is a “right” and what is a Right can be determined in several ways; if it requires, enlarging the powers of government, someone else paying for it without their consent, forces another to cede an actual Right, makes the receiver of the right dependent, gives people stuff, requires government intercession into the lives of it’s citizens or violates civilized behavior then it is not a right at all, but a trap. If however it, gives people power over government, stifles governments negative predilections, gives people freedom of (action, thought and values), demands nothing of others but tolerance and/or protects people from persecution, they can be rightfully called, Human Rights.
