^This is a very, very good example of P-Law’s disambiguating terms that have bee

^This is a very, very good example of P-Law’s disambiguating terms that have been used to lie: by conflating rights, privileges, and rights to suit in violation of either.


Source date (UTC): 2019-10-28 15:23:02 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188838590169731075

Reply addressees: @thanos_pope @JohnMarkSays

Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1188838159448236037


IN REPLY TO:

Unknown author

@thanos_pope @JohnMarkSays Rights to not exist in nature. Only possibilities. We MAKE rights.We can only make negative rights,because we can only refrain equally not DO equally. We can construct PRIVILEGES (not rights), in a polity. And we can grant the right of SUIT if those privileges or rights violated.

Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188838159448236037


IN REPLY TO:

@curtdoolittle

@thanos_pope @JohnMarkSays Rights to not exist in nature. Only possibilities. We MAKE rights.We can only make negative rights,because we can only refrain equally not DO equally. We can construct PRIVILEGES (not rights), in a polity. And we can grant the right of SUIT if those privileges or rights violated.

Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1188838159448236037

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *