Monday, October 27, 2008
"Positive" Rights
Classic HLS and Kennedy School continentalism. The history of this reasoning is not distinguished for its success.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a blog seeking precise and thoughtful dialogue on a wide range of topics. More often than not it will miss its mark; but we shall continue, learn, and grow.
Oh Noes!! Socialism for everyone? Not just for bankers? That's unconstitutional!
ReplyDeleteThe audio is fantastic but the text interruptions draw ridiculous conclusions based on stereotyping his "school" of thought rather than from anything he's actually saying. This is blind paranoia, nothing more.
The text inserts are idiot. But Obama's words are hopelessly naive. As I said, the history of such reasoning is not distinguished for its success.
ReplyDeleteNaive just because of redistributing the tax burden? I don't see how it's such a difficult proposition. Not literally "giving" money to those in the lower ses but freeing up capital from those in the upper levels seems pretty painless for all involved, and not terribly difficult. Of course then the question is what to do with that money, which then necessitates an administrative body, which then leads to distributing the money to the most capable, not just the most unfortunate... I could see how that part would get complicated sure.
ReplyDeleteI'm talking about something else: The distinction between negative freedoms against state power and positive rights owed by the state. The former is Anglo-American and the latter is continentalism. Obama is very much convinced that the Founders got this wrong. He is joined by the HLS and Kennedy School faculty and opposed by the considered judgments of nearly anyone else who has studied the matter.
ReplyDeleteHold it, Pericles: you are dangerously close to discussing actual ideas. Can't you get in trouble for that in your (political) neighborhood?
ReplyDeleteI hope not. I learned this distinction, and the folly of the HLS view, from my neighbors.
ReplyDelete