By Ayn Rand, 1946
The inalienable Rights of Men are: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The Right of Life means that Man cannot be deprived of his life for the benefit of another man nor of any number of other men. The Right of Liberty means Man’s right to individual action, individual choice, individual initiative, and individual property. Without the right to private property no independent action is possible. The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness means man’s right to live for himself, to choose what constitutes his own private, personal, individual happiness, and to work for its achievement so long as he respects the same right in others. It means that Man cannot be forced to devote his life to the happiness of another man nor of any number of other men. It means that the collective cannot decide what is to be the purpose of a man’s existence nor prescribe his choice of happiness.
Go to the World History Archives to read more.
February 1st, 2008 - 01:51
[…] bookmarks tagged wise From the Textbook of Americanism saved by 19 others triffin55 bookmarked on 02/01/08 | […]
February 4th, 2008 - 12:44
If that was a fundamental truth it would be implied that another man should not have to pay taxes to improve another’s life, or to pay for an army invading another country to improve peoples lives there.
It would be nice if that was a fundamental truth however it is simply a nice concept and idea, and does not fit into reality. It is the governments job to look after every one under it, and we give it the power to do just that - so if one part of its population is suffering it is just that it taxes the other halve REASONABLY to improve the lives of others.
However I am not saying it should be dismissed entirely, I think it should always be in the back of peoples minds, especially policy makers, and especially when it comes to freedom of choice, expression and pursuit of happiness. As long as they are not infringing on others peoples liberties (and being offended does not count as having your liberties infringed) it should be allowed. If someone does find themselves slightly put out, but not significantly effected, they should suffer it in the name of liberty.
February 5th, 2008 - 16:52
I believe the “inalienable Rights of Men” as presented by Rand are the ideal for men as individuals. They have obviously been compromised by the needs of society. We can not cede our allegiances in return for our freedoms. But we should never lose sight that it is men that make up the world, not governments.