Man is the rational animal
Like all living beings, man requires certain values to survive, but he is unique in that he must choose the values necessary for his life because he has no automatic means of doing so. It is his ability to experience the world around him and comprehend it by the use of reason that gives him the capacity to understand the values his life requires, and then achieve them. Every value we enjoy in our civilized, comfortable, existence is the product of the application of man’s mind to reality.
There is no “collective mind”
All creative effort, every invention in history, was created by the mental effort of individual men and women. When they worked together, their knowledge was increased by the work of predecessors, but each advance they made was their own. The mind cannot be received, shared, or borrowed.
Man requires freedom to live
To live, man must achieve the values necessary to sustain his live. To achieve his values, man must be free to think and to act on his judgment. Restrictions on freedom force man to focus not on the absolutes of reality, but on the arbitrary ideas of others. In a free society, a man can choose to not associate with those who do not respect his judgment – by finding a new job, new friends, or a new lover. Even if there is no one to share his ideas, every man is still free to present his own vision – by publishing his ideas or becoming an entrepreneur. However, as soon as he faces the threat of physical force, the possibility of any such alternatives becomes irrelevant. The initiation of force renders the mind useless as a means of survival.
Freedom requires rights
Rights are moral principles defining man’s freedom of action in society. The purpose of establishing individual rights is to protect man from man – to define the basic conditions necessary for social existence. All rights derive from a man’s right to his own life, including the rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Whether it is by a theft, force, fraud, or government coercion, man’s rights can be violated only by the initiation of force.
Rights are inalienable and non-conflicting
Rights are not guarantees to things or obligations placed on others, but only guarantees to freedom from violence (the right to life), freedom of action (the right to liberty), and the results of those actions (the right to property). In a free society, men deal with one another exclusively by trade, voluntarily exchanging value for value to their mutual benefit. The only obligations one’s rights impose on other men is to respect the same and equal rights of others – the freedom to be left alone. A man may have his rights violated by a criminal or a government, but morally he remains, in the right, and the criminal in the wrong.
Further reading:
- “Man’s Rights” and “The Nature of Government” in
Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal
by Ayn Rand - The One Minute Case For Capitalism
- “What is Capitalism?” by David Veksler
- “The Initiation of Physical Force As Evil” by David Veksler
#1 by dwindle - May 3rd, 2009 at 17:31
Quaint, but meaningless. None of the things are true, they are simply romantic notions of a perfect existence. Man does not need to be any more rational than animals. Consider the power religion has had over man for thousands of years. A devout worshiper obeys his master just as a squirrel obeys his instinct. He also does not need rights nor freedom – millions have lived as slave from cradle to grave and never expected a minutes freedom, yet continue breathing none the less. The only reason freedom requires rights is because they are recursive; both are essentially the same thing. Rights are, as you have likely seen throughout your life, very conflicting and alienable. Do we have a right to own a gun, or a right to live without fear of them? Right to life, or rights to an abortion? If rights were inalienable, we wouldn’t debate them every four years.
#2 by S.Smith - May 5th, 2009 at 02:57
Rights like freedom are not individually inalienable, but inalienable in the long-term of human history.
They are also existential inalienable for individuals, but common liberties are as imaginary as these digital words.
#3 by glorybe - August 20th, 2009 at 22:10
The notion of capitalism is flawed beyond repair. It is not wrong to compete, to try to deliver a better product or at least a similar product at a lower price. But when that notion is taken to the level of a moral belief it is simply silly. And trying to state facts about capitalism is absurd. Name one place where capitalism has actually existed and then we can discuss its supposed advantages. Regulation and taxation occur in all cultures in some form and that precludes capitalism from existence. Since no nation has ever tried capitalism just who swears that it is either good or efficient?
#4 by Robert Taylor - October 24th, 2009 at 17:48
Why would you consider it “silly” to enunciate the moral grounds of capitalism? Au contrare…it is essential. You apparently believe that unless we must experience 100% laissez-faire to have capitalism…all or nothing. Now THAT is silly! We are, at present, a semi-capitalist country BECAUSE we have diluted the Constitution on the one hand and elected and re-elected politicians that make deals with businesses to create monopolies or perform special favors for “groups”(there are no group rights). Maybe one day we’ll learn to separate business and state the way we have church and state.