Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I repeat this, because it is a powerful reminder of what modernist might mean in political sciences: International human rights experts actually speak of three "generations" of rights. First generation rights are political and civil, and are usually negative rights. Second generation rights involve the government's socio-economic obligations, and are frequently positive rights. Finally, third generation rights are exemplified by the right to a clean and healthy environment, and are commonly called "green" rights. Such a view was unknown by Enlightenment thinkers of the 18th century. Baloney! Study the common law of trespass and nuisance. It was known well before the Enlightenment thinkers were even born. It is quite a stretch to claim nobody ever considered what might happen when, "Your chocolate is in my peanut butter!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Then why did Reeses peanut butter cups come so late on the scene? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Here's the funny thing, as I have pointed out before: The government is in the hands of an oligarchy? Check! The oligarchy is working against the interests of the common worker? Check! Originalism attempts to restrict "government as a tool" of the oligarchs? Check! Workers against Originalism? Hmmm..... Something doesn't connect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Then why did Reeses peanut butter cups come so late on the scene? Because the Italians stole spaghetti from the Chinese. Everybody knows that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 It all connects. Your logic escapes me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 From Wiki: The tort of nuisance has existed since the reign of Henry III, with few changes, and most of them merely technical.[5] It originally came from the Latin nocumentum, and then the French nuisance, with Henry de Bracton initially defining the tort of nuisance as an infringement of easements.[6] The tort was in line with the economic status quo of the time, protecting claimants against their neighbours' rights to develop land... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuisance_in_English_law Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 It all connects. Your logic escapes me. That bad, is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 One day it's, "Government is bad, evil... a tool of oligarchs to oppress working people." The next day it's, "The government's powers should not be limited by antiquated restrictions in the Constitution." I wonder what tomorrow will bring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 Haha. You can spend an hour (or less) reading about the South African Constitution and come out with knowledge that it works better than ours. Haha. I already said I couldn't judge the outcome. I was challenged to find a better blueprint. I found one I like better. And, I said exactly why I like it better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 I repeat this, because it is a powerful reminder of what modernist might mean in political sciences: International human rights experts actually speak of three "generations" of rights. First generation rights are political and civil, and are usually negative rights. Second generation rights involve the government's socio-economic obligations, and are frequently positive rights. Finally, third generation rights are exemplified by the right to a clean and healthy environment, and are commonly called "green" rights. Such a view was unknown by Enlightenment thinkers of the 18th century. Baloney! Study the common law of trespass and nuisance. It was known well before the Enlightenment thinkers were even born. It is quite a stretch to claim nobody ever considered what might happen when, "Your chocolate is in my peanut butter!" Ok, so where in our constitution is the right to a clean environment? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 Ok, so where in our constitution is the right to a clean environment? The general welfare clause covers all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 Here's the funny thing, as I have pointed out before: The government is in the hands of an oligarchy? Check! The oligarchy is working against the interests of the common worker? Check! Originalism attempts to restrict "government as a tool" of the oligarchs? Check! Workers against Originalism? Hmmm..... Something doesn't connect. What doesn't connect is your analysis. O'ism embraces the status quo. The Founders were the Oligarchy of the time. For example, look at how poor the representation is? That dreadful representation is a tool of the establishment, the elites who have deplored democracy, deplored factions, deplored special interests (populism) forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 Ok, so where in our constitution is the right to a clean environment? The general welfare clause covers all. By some interpretation maybe, but certainly not expressed directly as is recommended in MODERN political science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 From Wiki: The tort of nuisance has existed since the reign of Henry III, with few changes, and most of them merely technical.[5] It originally came from the Latin nocumentum, and then the French nuisance, with Henry de Bracton initially defining the tort of nuisance as an infringement of easements.[6] The tort was in line with the economic status quo of the time, protecting claimants against their neighbours' rights to develop land... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuisance_in_English_law By comparison, the modern Constitution of S.A> Chapter 2 of the Constitution of South Africa Chapter 2 is a bill of rights which enumerates the civil, political, economic, social and cultural human rights of the people of South Africa. Most of these rights apply to anyone in the country, with the exception of the right to vote, the right to work and the right to enter the country, which apply only to citizens. They also apply to juristic persons to the extent that they are applicable, taking into account the nature of the right. The rights enumerated are: Section 9: everyone is equal before the law and has right to equal protection and the benefit of the law. Prohibited grounds of discrimination include race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status,ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. Section 10: the right to human dignity. Section 11: the right to life, which has been held to prohibit capital punishment,[8] but does not prohibit abortion.[9] Section 12: the right to freedom and security of the person, including protection against arbitrary detention and detention without trial, the right to be protected against violence, freedom fromtorture, freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment, the right to bodily integrity, and reproductive rights. Section 13: freedom from slavery, servitude or forced labour. Section 14: the right to privacy, including protection against search and seizure, and the privacy of correspondence. Section 15: freedom of thought and freedom of religion. Section 16: freedom of speech and expression, including freedom of the press and academic freedom. Explicitly excluded are propaganda for war, incitement to violence and hate speech. Section 17: freedom of assembly and the right to protest. Section 18: freedom of association. Section 19: the right to vote and universal adult suffrage; the right to stand for public office; the right to free, fair and regular elections; and the right to form, join and campaign for a political party. Section 20: no citizen may be deprived of citizenship. Section 21: freedom of movement, including the right to leave South Africa, the right of citizens to a passport and the right to enter South Africa. Section 22: the right to choose a trade, occupation or profession, although these may be regulated by law. Section 23: labour rights, including the right to unionise and the right to strike. Section 24: the right to a healthy environment and the right to have the environment protected. Section 25: the right to property, limited in that property may only be expropriated under a law of general application (not arbitrarily), for a public purpose and with the payment of compensation. Section 26: the right to housing, including the right to due process with regard to court-ordered eviction and demolition. Section 27: the rights to food, water, health care and social assistance, which the state must progressively realise within the limits of its resources. Section 28: children's rights, including the right to a name and nationality, the right to family or parental care, the right to a basic standard of living, the right to be protected from maltreatment andabuse, the protection from inappropriate child labour, the right not to be detained except as a last resort, the paramountcy of the best interests of the child and the right to an independent lawyer in court cases involving the child, and the prohibition of the military use of children. Section 29: the right to education, including a universal right to basic education. Section 30: the right to use the language of one's choice and to participate in the cultural life of one's choice. Section 31: the right of cultural, religious or linguistic communities to enjoy their culture, practise their religion and use their language. Section 32: the right of access to information, including all information held by the government. Section 33: the right to justice in administrative action by the government. Section 34: the right of access to the courts. Section 35: the rights of arrested, detained and accused people, including the right to silence, protection against self-incrimination, the right to counsel and legal aid, the right to a fair trial, thepresumption of innocence and the prohibition of double jeopardy and ex post facto crimes. Section 36 allows the rights listed to be limited only by laws of general application, and only to the extent that the restriction is reasonable and justifiable in "an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom."[10] Section 37 allows certain rights to be limited during a state of emergency but places strict procedural limits on the declaration of states of emergency and provides for the rights of people detained as a result. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 One day it's, "Government is bad, evil... a tool of oligarchs to oppress working people." The next day it's, "The government's powers should not be limited by antiquated restrictions in the Constitution." I wonder what tomorrow will bring. Are you confused then between "the government" "the Constitution" and "the oligarchy?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 16, 2016 Author Share Posted February 16, 2016 I think it is far simpler than is being made out. Our Founders ratified a Constitution permitting slavery, and no suffrage for women. That alone, with no more analysis, defines an old set of ideas by men who could think no better. A modern Constitution, from modern thinkers, would have no such hurdles to over come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 16, 2016 Share Posted February 16, 2016 I think it is far simpler than is being made out. Our Founders ratified a Constitution permitting slavery, and no suffrage for women. That alone, with no more analysis, defines an old set of ideas by men who could think no better. A modern Constitution, from modern thinkers, would have no such hurdles to over come. The Constitution, as amended, is the law. You are criticizing something which was long ago superseded. Anyway, if you are unable to see the inconsistency in your various positions concerning restrictions on government and conspiracy-theories, then, there is little left to argue. I am not in your shoes, but when I spot myself being inconsistent or confused, I tend to admit it. It keeps me open-minded and capable of learning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 I think it is far simpler than is being made out. Our Founders ratified a Constitution permitting slavery, and no suffrage for women. That alone, with no more analysis, defines an old set of ideas by men who could think no better. A modern Constitution, from modern thinkers, would have no such hurdles to over come. The Constitution, as amended, is the law. You are criticizing something which was long ago superseded. Anyway, if you are unable to see the inconsistency in your various positions concerning restrictions on government and conspiracy-theories, then, there is little left to argue. I am not in your shoes, but when I spot myself being inconsistent or confused, I tend to admit it. It keeps me open-minded and capable of learning. Again with the conspiracy theories? Where do you get this stuff? I haven't mentioned any conspiracy here. But I did demonstrate easily that old is not virtuous when it comes to blueprints for a nation. Whenever you are flummoxed you resort to an escape hatch of yelling "conspiracy theory." Find the conspiracy theory in this thread and quote it. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted February 17, 2016 Author Share Posted February 17, 2016 From Wiki: The tort of nuisance has existed since the reign of Henry III, with few changes, and most of them merely technical.[5] It originally came from the Latin nocumentum, and then the French nuisance, with Henry de Bracton initially defining the tort of nuisance as an infringement of easements.[6] The tort was in line with the economic status quo of the time, protecting claimants against their neighbours' rights to develop land... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuisance_in_English_law By comparison, the modern Constitution of S.A> Chapter 2 of the Constitution of South Africa Chapter 2 is a bill of rights which enumerates the civil, political, economic, social and cultural human rights of the people of South Africa. Most of these rights apply to anyone in the country, with the exception of the right to vote, the right to work and the right to enter the country, which apply only to citizens. They also apply to juristic persons to the extent that they are applicable, taking into account the nature of the right. The rights enumerated are: Section 9: everyone is equal before the law and has right to equal protection and the benefit of the law. Prohibited grounds of discrimination include race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status,ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. Section 10: the right to human dignity. Section 11: the right to life, which has been held to prohibit capital punishment,[8] but does not prohibit abortion.[9] Section 12: the right to freedom and security of the person, including protection against arbitrary detention and detention without trial, the right to be protected against violence, freedom fromtorture, freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment, the right to bodily integrity, and reproductive rights. Section 13: freedom from slavery, servitude or forced labour. Section 14: the right to privacy, including protection against search and seizure, and the privacy of correspondence. Section 15: freedom of thought and freedom of religion. Section 16: freedom of speech and expression, including freedom of the press and academic freedom. Explicitly excluded are propaganda for war, incitement to violence and hate speech. Section 17: freedom of assembly and the right to protest. Section 18: freedom of association. Section 19: the right to vote and universal adult suffrage; the right to stand for public office; the right to free, fair and regular elections; and the right to form, join and campaign for a political party. Section 20: no citizen may be deprived of citizenship. Section 21: freedom of movement, including the right to leave South Africa, the right of citizens to a passport and the right to enter South Africa. Section 22: the right to choose a trade, occupation or profession, although these may be regulated by law. Section 23: labour rights, including the right to unionise and the right to strike. Section 24: the right to a healthy environment and the right to have the environment protected. Section 25: the right to property, limited in that property may only be expropriated under a law of general application (not arbitrarily), for a public purpose and with the payment of compensation. Section 26: the right to housing, including the right to due process with regard to court-ordered eviction and demolition. Section 27: the rights to food, water, health care and social assistance, which the state must progressively realise within the limits of its resources. Section 28: children's rights, including the right to a name and nationality, the right to family or parental care, the right to a basic standard of living, the right to be protected from maltreatment andabuse, the protection from inappropriate child labour, the right not to be detained except as a last resort, the paramountcy of the best interests of the child and the right to an independent lawyer in court cases involving the child, and the prohibition of the military use of children. Section 29: the right to education, including a universal right to basic education. Section 30: the right to use the language of one's choice and to participate in the cultural life of one's choice. Section 31: the right of cultural, religious or linguistic communities to enjoy their culture, practise their religion and use their language. Section 32: the right of access to information, including all information held by the government. Section 33: the right to justice in administrative action by the government. Section 34: the right of access to the courts. Section 35: the rights of arrested, detained and accused people, including the right to silence, protection against self-incrimination, the right to counsel and legal aid, the right to a fair trial, thepresumption of innocence and the prohibition of double jeopardy and ex post facto crimes. Section 36 allows the rights listed to be limited only by laws of general application, and only to the extent that the restriction is reasonable and justifiable in "an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom."[10] Section 37 allows certain rights to be limited during a state of emergency but places strict procedural limits on the declaration of states of emergency and provides for the rights of people detained as a result. Gee, we eventually fixed slavery and women's suffrage. I wonder how long it wolf take to get to this Bill of Rights? Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 I think it is far simpler than is being made out. Our Founders ratified a Constitution permitting slavery, and no suffrage for women. That alone, with no more analysis, defines an old set of ideas by men who could think no better. A modern Constitution, from modern thinkers, would have no such hurdles to over come. The Constitution, as amended, is the law. You are criticizing something which was long ago superseded. Anyway, if you are unable to see the inconsistency in your various positions concerning restrictions on government and conspiracy-theories, then, there is little left to argue. I am not in your shoes, but when I spot myself being inconsistent or confused, I tend to admit it. It keeps me open-minded and capable of learning. Again with the conspiracy theories? Where do you get this stuff?I haven't mentioned any conspiracy here. But I did demonstrate easily that old is not virtuous when it comes to blueprints for a nation. Whenever you are flummoxed you resort to an escape hatch of yelling "conspiracy theory." Find the conspiracy theory in this thread and quote it. Sent from my SM-T330NU using Tapatalk "n this thread?" Why does it have to be in this thread? If it's not in this thread, does it mean you no longer believe it? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.