Rights and responsibilities (50)
Yes simply because people had to prove they had what it takes to be allocated a vote and, put their money where their mouth awas so to speak. No free rides.
Good thread IB.
""Interspersed throughout the book are other flashbacks to Rico's high school History and Moral Philosophy course, which describe how in the Terran Federation of Rico's day, the rights of a full Citizen (to vote, and hold public office) must be earned through some form of volunteer Federal service. Those residents who have not exercised their right to perform this Federal Service retain the other rights generally associated with a modern democracy (free speech, assembly, etc.), but they cannot vote or hold public office. This structure arose ad hoc after the collapse of the 20th century Western democracies, brought on by both social failures at home (and by extension, the poor handling of juvenile delinquency) and military defeat by the Chinese Hegemony overseas.""
Good thread IB.
""Interspersed throughout the book are other flashbacks to Rico's high school History and Moral Philosophy course, which describe how in the Terran Federation of Rico's day, the rights of a full Citizen (to vote, and hold public office) must be earned through some form of volunteer Federal service. Those residents who have not exercised their right to perform this Federal Service retain the other rights generally associated with a modern democracy (free speech, assembly, etc.), but they cannot vote or hold public office. This structure arose ad hoc after the collapse of the 20th century Western democracies, brought on by both social failures at home (and by extension, the poor handling of juvenile delinquency) and military defeat by the Chinese Hegemony overseas.""
------ This poll is Archived ------
So,actually what Heinlein is saying,that my Rights reside with the State,Not with me?
How Collectivist of him!
How Collectivist of him!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: So,actually what Heinlein is saying,that my Rights reside with the State,Not with me?
How Collectivist of him!
Government is supposed to be the Custodian of my Rights,NOT the Owner/Originator!How Collectivist of him!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Government is supposed to be the Custodian of my Rights,NOT the Owner/Originator!
Based upon what? If I am too apathetic to care about my rights do I deserve them? You just have to look at some of the numpties elected into power by the sheep who compose the majority of the voting population of most democratic governments. If Mr. Voter had really had to fight for his vote, if he had had to spend X years up to his neck in unpleasantness building infrastructure or teaching or whatever to get his/her vote do you think they would use it so casually? What you haven't earned you don't respect, what you don't respect you don't deserve?
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Government is supposed to be the Custodian of my Rights,NOT the Owner/Originator!
I agree. The whole premise demonstrates the naivete characteristic of Heinlein, whose decades-old space operas remain popular with adolescents for just such reasons.
One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
(Ok, both are dictatorships, but it's different if I'm the dictator.)
------ This poll is Archived ------
Dagosto:
One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
He didn't neglect it, you just never read the book or watched the movie.
People choose their own service be it military, volunteer or whatever.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Dagosto: I agree. The whole premise demonstrates the naivete characteristic of Heinlein, whose decades-old space operas remain popular with adolescents for just such reasons.
One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
(Ok, both are dictatorships, but it's different if I'm the dictator.)
Exactly!One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
(Ok, both are dictatorships, but it's different if I'm the dictator.)
My Rights belong to me!
If they are bestowed on me by some Government,they are mere Privileges,to be withdrawn at the Whim of any Politician!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Dagosto: I agree. The whole premise demonstrates the naivete characteristic of Heinlein, whose decades-old space operas remain popular with adolescents for just such reasons.
Actually a fairly similar system worked in Rome. You could gain Roman citizenship by serving in the armed forces of Rome, or what about the American military where you can gain citizenship by fighting for the US military?
Dagosto:
One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
(Ok, both are dictatorships, but it's different if I'm the dictator.)
One question Heinlein neglected was, Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship.
(Ok, both are dictatorships, but it's different if I'm the dictator.)
I'd say a computer, provided with your results from school and any other relevant facts, qualifications or skills makes the decision of how you could best serve. Stops any attempts at backscratching for those with political, or any other kind of power.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Exactly!
My Rights belong to me!
If they are bestowed on me by some Government,they are mere Privileges,to be withdrawn at the Whim of any Politician!
My Rights belong to me!
If they are bestowed on me by some Government,they are mere Privileges,to be withdrawn at the Whim of any Politician!
You mean like they already are being? In the name of security, or whatever excuse they decide to use next. By presenting us with a continual state of war, war against drugs, war against terrorism etc our rights are slowly being withdrawn, modified (never to increase them, mind you) or placed within limits.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Iuchi_Zien: Actually a fairly similar system worked in Rome. You could gain Roman citizenship by serving in the armed forces of Rome, or what about the American military where you can gain citizenship by fighting for the US military?
I'd say a computer, provided with your results from school and any other relevant facts, qualifications or skills makes the decision of how you could best serve. Stops any attempts at backscratching for those with political, or any other kind of power.
And WHO programs that Computer?I'd say a computer, provided with your results from school and any other relevant facts, qualifications or skills makes the decision of how you could best serve. Stops any attempts at backscratching for those with political, or any other kind of power.
BTW,there are other avenues to become a US Citizen than Military Service!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: And WHO programs that Computer?
BTW,there are other avenues to become a US Citizen than Military Service!
And WHO decides on the Criteria by which my Citizenship "Rights" are decided?BTW,there are other avenues to become a US Citizen than Military Service!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Albertaghost: He didn't neglect it, you just never read the book or watched the movie.
People choose their own service be it military, volunteer or whatever.
People choose their own service be it military, volunteer or whatever.
I did indeed read it, as I read all Heinlein's works. When I was an adolescent.
Grim political reality does not often feature in Heinlein, and when it does, it is portrayed as a game that old people play, like Bridge. Invariably the central characters find some sneaky way to circumvent what they regard as (and are portrayed as) silly restrictions, but what we might call core principles of governance and of international relations.
I admire Heinlein as a hard-working and sometimes inventive writer. But not as a political philosopher.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: And WHO programs that Computer?
BTW,there are other avenues to become a US Citizen than Military Service!
BTW,there are other avenues to become a US Citizen than Military Service!
Yes, I know, which just shows that it already exists if you are not born with the rights. I don't see why it is so important who programs the computer. I mean you can argue that in some ways it is no different to compulsary conscription. You are expected, as a citisen, to do your X years, whether in the military or voluntary sector. The difference is you are given a choice, if you don't want to serve then you don't have to disappear off to foreign climates to avoid it.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Iuchi_Zien: Yes, I know, which just shows that it already exists if you are not born with the rights. I don't see why it is so important who programs the computer. I mean you can argue that in some ways it is no different to compulsary conscription. You are expected, as a citisen, to do your X years, whether in the military or voluntary sector. The difference is you are given a choice, if you don't want to serve then you don't have to disappear off to foreign climates to avoid it.
You,In essence still maintain that i have to buy mi rights from Government,ie from the Collective!Nope,Nope,Nope!
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A—and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational. Any group, any gang, any nation that attempts to negate man’s rights, is wrong, which means: is evil, which means: is anti-life.
For the New Intellectual Galt’s Speech
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: You,In essence still maintain that i have to buy mi rights from Government,ie from the Collective!
Nope,Nope,Nope!
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A—and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational. Any group, any gang, any nation that attempts to negate man’s rights, is wrong, which means: is evil, which means: is anti-life.
For the New Intellectual Galt’s Speech
Nope,Nope,Nope!
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A—and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational. Any group, any gang, any nation that attempts to negate man’s rights, is wrong, which means: is evil, which means: is anti-life.
For the New Intellectual Galt’s Speech
Why are your rights unconditional, and what rights are unconditional?
The right to life? tell that to the victims of war. The right to liberty? How many countries, even democracies, are holding people without trial or even knowledge of why they are being held. Freedom to travel? Really!
You say your rights are unconditional, no they are not. If the majority decide to impliment laws which restrict those rights as part of that democracy you are obliged to follow. Government is supposed to be the will of the majority, not independant of it. As a participant of that democracy you are bound by the results of that democracies decisions aren't you?
------ This poll is Archived ------
Dagosto:
I admire Heinlein as a hard-working and sometimes inventive writer. But not as a political philosopher.
I admire Heinlein as a hard-working and sometimes inventive writer. But not as a political philosopher.
Likewise however, nobody said he was the end all be all but rather the question is a yes or no. You added "Who gets to decide who is fit for what form of Citizenship Service? If the answer is Me, I'm all for it. If the answer is anyone else, it's a dictatorship."
If I recall, the government in the book had to accommodate everyone in 'Federal Service' who wished to sign up to serve their country regardless of physical or mental abilities or inabilities. It doesn't state strictly military however, during the story, the world is at war, a rather big one so I would assume they need more infantry than tree planters. As well, by seeing how the friends all get to choose which branch they can go to once they qualify after basic training, assume they still get to choose, even after they have chosen military service.
Anyhow, it's only a book and, a really cool movie but this discussion is what is on our plate right now. Myself, I believe our society would be far better off if young people spent a couple of years in some form of service approved by their country be it ag, peace corps type of activity, charity and volunteer work, law enforcement or military etc.
------ This poll is Archived ------
I agree every right should be earned, its just a logical progression in our society. From teacher to a professor, from doctor to a specialist. from corporal to a sergeant… from a tent owner to a home owner.. 
------ This poll is Archived ------
AgentAjax: I agree every right should be earned, its just a logical progression in our society. From teacher to a professor, from doctor to a specialist. from corporal to a sergeant… from a tent owner to a home owner..
earned from WHOM?Why do you think it is called a RIGHT and Not a Privilege?
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Studying at University or College,or building a Business doesn't count for anything?
Sure does! For example, in this sort of society, a person who is an engineering grad or student can work building bridges or water wells in a third world country or, levys in the US.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Albertaghost: Sure does! For example, in this sort of society, a person who is an engineering grad or student can work building bridges or water wells in a third world country or, levys in the US.
Why should he?------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Why should he?
There is no requirement for the person to seek citizenship, it is a choice. If he feels no desire to involve himself in government or no desire to vote then he is perefctly entitled to do so. There is no compulsion.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Why should he?
Guaranteed!Not a "Sale" by Government!
once again!
Man holds these rights, not from the Collective nor for the Collective, but against the Collective—as a barrier which the Collective cannot cross; . . . these rights are man’s protection against all other men.
The Ayn Rand Column “Textbook of Americanism"
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad there is some merit to “rights been earned”… just like respect. As kids this is the first thing we are tot. You would be surprised how many rights you have demanded from all types of institutions over the years…Why not a right to vote? What’s wrong with first proving yourself as a valid contributor to your society, that your vote will be counted in the interest of all and not just to accommodate your immediate needs? 
------ This poll is Archived ------
Iuchi_Zien: Don't they? When punishment for a crime is applied this can include restrictions on almost all your freedoms, in some cases even your right to life. Does the 'criminal' get to choose which of his rights are inalienable? Look at Germany early-mid 30's didn't the people 'give up' a lot of freedoms and rights in exchange for economic prosperity? or at least the appearance of it. Russia did the same in the early 20000's less democratic freedom in exchange for economic prosperity. History is littered with similar events.
Doin't you have to pay for your passport? So you are already paying for your freedom to travel. I disagree with your arguement that you own your rights, you only have the rights others are prepared to allow you. If you stand, unarmed, in front of somebody with a gun you only have the rights the person with the gun allows you. On a larger scale....
No, war shows with absolute clarity exactly how few rights you truly possess.
Evil is defined by the majority, it is not a fixed 'state' 1,500 years ago marriage and consumation of marriages happened to children as young as thirteen and that was the norm. Today such an act would be considered evil. Three thousand years ago the blinding of ten thousand people was considered 'a bit harsh' today??
Doin't you have to pay for your passport? So you are already paying for your freedom to travel. I disagree with your arguement that you own your rights, you only have the rights others are prepared to allow you. If you stand, unarmed, in front of somebody with a gun you only have the rights the person with the gun allows you. On a larger scale....
No, war shows with absolute clarity exactly how few rights you truly possess.
Evil is defined by the majority, it is not a fixed 'state' 1,500 years ago marriage and consumation of marriages happened to children as young as thirteen and that was the norm. Today such an act would be considered evil. Three thousand years ago the blinding of ten thousand people was considered 'a bit harsh' today??
You splitting hair!Paying for a Passport is paying for a Service!
You still offer up a lot of Red Herrings!
But not a bit of proof that an Individual doesn't owns his Rights!
If they were bestowed by Government,they would be Privileges,not Guarantied Rights!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: Why should he?
Well, going back to the OP, the question is asked if I would be happy living in such a society. I take this to mean that we are now dealing with a fictitious society in which this is law so, since we are arguing this fictitious society, in order to become a citizen and have rights in which he can vote or hold office, he needs to serve his country in some capacity.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Albertaghost: Well, going back to the OP, the question is asked if I would be happy living in such a society. I take this to mean that we are now dealing with a fictitious society in which this is law so, since we are arguing this fictitious society, in order to become a citizen and have rights in which he can vote or hold office, he needs to serve his country in some capacity.
except I wouldn't want to live in that kind of Society,where you hold your Right by the Grace of the Collective!Actually they are merely Privileges,if you have to "Buy" them from the Tribe!
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: The Ayn Rand Column “Textbook of Americanism"
You keep quoting this as if it was some form of holy scripture. It isn't it is a book. Books saying something doesn't make it automatically right. Rather than just quoting from the 'holy' book give us reasons why we are wrong and the book is right. In what way would a state operating ala 'Terran Federation' not allow the freedoms you have listed above? In what way is it worse than, for example the Roman senate? or Athen's democracy or any of the thousands of governments men have lived under for thousands of year. Even under the most liberal governments there is an assumption that in the event of threat to that state you would be expected to take up arms in its defence, how is that different from what Heinlein suggested?
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: You splitting hair!
Paying for a Passport is paying for a Service!
You still offer up a lot of Red Herrings!
But not a bit of proof that an Individual doesn't owns his Rights!
If they were bestowed by Government,they would be Privileges,not Guarantied Rights!
Paying for a Passport is paying for a Service!
You still offer up a lot of Red Herrings!
But not a bit of proof that an Individual doesn't owns his Rights!
If they were bestowed by Government,they would be Privileges,not Guarantied Rights!
It seems to me that you define a red herring as anything which disagrees with your opinion? Perhaps I should just describe all your arguments as red herrings and therefore unworthy of response?
You say they would be privileges not rights, now who's splitting hairs? A passport is a requirement to travel. If the state decides to withold it you don't travel, and your state has the right to confiscate or withold such documents. So whether you call it a right or a privilege you still don't get to travel without it.
------ This poll is Archived ------
Iuchi_Zien: You keep quoting this as if it was some form of holy scripture. It isn't it is a book. Books saying something doesn't make it automatically right. Rather than just quoting from the 'holy' book give us reasons why we are wrong and the book is right. In what way would a state operating ala 'Terran Federation' not allow the freedoms you have listed above? In what way is it worse than, for example the Roman senate? or Athen's democracy or any of the thousands of governments men have lived under for thousands of year. Even under the most liberal governments there is an assumption that in the event of threat to that state you would be expected to take up arms in its defence, how is that different from what Heinlein suggested?
You're stuck so deep in Collectivism that you are unable to see the difference between Rights and Privileges!Under Heinlein's System,what will prevent the Leaders from upping the Ante anytime they please,and load you with extra Duties to keep your "Rights"?
------ This poll is Archived ------
Conrad73: except I wouldn't want to live in that kind of Society,where you hold your Right by the Grace of the Collective!
Actually they are merely Privileges,if you have to "Buy" them from the Tribe!
Actually they are merely Privileges,if you have to "Buy" them from the Tribe!
Then you vote 'no' then.
In such a fictitious society, you do have the right to live and do have rights as enshrined by law. You just don't have the right to change anything by vote or, by being a leader. You can certainly demonstrate and are able to enact freedom of speech but voting power is held by those who have put their money where their mouth is so to speak.
This pretty much would not be a problem for most of the free world as they don't do this anyways.
------ This poll is Archived ------
This Poll is Archived
This Poll is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Poll get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
More Threads
More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
The weird and the random facts around the world
men's perspective towards women
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
your favorite topic?
s*xual skills
Ladies
Unions support Democrats!
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Stats for this Poll
22 Votes
2,050 Views
50 Comments
Created: Aug 2011
Last Viewed: 14 hrs ago
Last Commented: Aug 2011
Last Voted: Jul 2017
0 Likes
Related Forums
- More Proof The GOP is a Criminal Organization
- The weird and the random facts around the world
- men's perspective towards women
- The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
- Would you hire this guy - for any job?
- your favorite topic?
- s*xual skills
- Ladies
- Unions support Democrats!
- Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
Rights and responsibilities(Vote Below)
The overall theme of the book is that social responsibility requires being prepared to make individual sacrifice. Heinlein's Terran Federation is a limited democracy with aspects of a meritocracy based on willingness to sacrifice in the common interest. Suffrage belongs only to those willing to serve their society by at least two years of volunteer Federal Service – "the franchise is today limited to discharged veterans", (ch. XII), instead of anyone "...who is 18 years old and has a body temperature near 37 °C" The Federation is required to find a place for anyone who desires to serve, regardless of his skill or aptitude (this also includes service ranging from teaching to dangerous non-military work such as serving as experimental medical test subjects).
There is an explicitly-made contrast to the democracies of the 20th century, which according to the novel, collapsed because "people had been led to believe that they could simply vote for whatever they wanted... and get it, without toil, without sweat, without tears." Indeed, Colonel Dubois criticizes as unrealistic the famous U.S. Declaration of Independence line concerning "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". No one can stop anyone from pursuing happiness, but life and liberty are said to exist only if they are deliberately sought and paid for.
Would you be happy to live in the 'Terran Federation'?
If "yes", why? If "no" why?