Every right is exclusive: it aims to exclude all others from commanding that over what the right is invested.
A right is only meaningful when there are means, available (included being to the knowledge of) to the right owner, to successfully defend it against any other attempt to violate it.
A rules structure is any list of all not conflicting rights.
Conflict comes from the confronting of two or more different rules structures.
Conflict is a case of absence of cooperation (the only other case of absence of cooperation being autarky).
The set of actions, either by one agents or by more, aimed to defend a rules structure, i. .e. to attack any other rules structure, conforms a government.
A government is, by definition, in conflict (i. e. in war) with any other government.
Two apparent governments which are in no conflict whatsoever, i. e. which defend the same rules structure, are not two governments but two parts of one same government.
One apparent same government which changes a rules structure, i. e. which enters into conflict with a previously defended rules structure at least in some part, it is not the same government than before but other government, therefore an enemy of the former, even if it is composed by the same people, and governs in the same place than the former. A change in the rules structure is, in kind and regardless of magnitude, akin to a coup d'état.
The apparent "meta-right" of having the right to change other rights amounts to the effective non-existence of those other rights. As long as some have the effective power to change others' rights, the others don't have rights but only the some.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
A praxeological modelling of government
Labels:
coercion,
government,
property,
right,
rules structure,
semantics
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment