Acerca de
WHAT ARE RIGHTS?
RIGHTS AND PROPERTY
Human Rights are most easily understood when considered through Apophatic Inquiry. This is a method of logical, deductive reasoning that is employed when given a limited set of possibilities. By excluding the known negatives we gain knowledge about something. In other words, we're describing what something is by explaining what it's not. This process helps us to understand what a Right actually is by understanding the actions that are not Rights due to the harm they cause. ​
Our Rights are not only inherent and unalienable, they are countless; but the amount of Wrong-Doings are few. Let's examine these Natural Law transgressions, or violent actions: ​
Murder — To willfully take a life without the right to do so. If a being is killed through self-defense, it is not murder.
Assault ​— To initiate physical violence, causing bodily harm to another, stealing their well-being. Defensive force against assault is not, itself, assault.
Rape — The theft of someone's sexual autonomy through coercion and unrightful use of force. This is also a form of assault.
Property Theft — The theft of someone else's creation or property. You have no right to take from someone anything that does not rightfully belong to you. ​
Trespass — Everyone has the right to personal space in their own private living domain. To invade that domain without their consent is to steal their security. ​
Coercion — Forcing someone through the threat of violence to comply with your will or demands. It is the theft of free will.
Deception — Taking someone's ability to know and understand the truth and make informed decisions.
All of these transgressions can be narrowed down to just one wrong-doing: THEFT. Every harmful action that a person is capable of taking is theft. Some form of property is always being stolen. When you are in Rightful Ownership of something, you and you alone are in control of it and responsible for it. Therefore, it is your property.
​
Communists promote the abolition of private property, and most people tend to equate that with physical property like vehicles, homes, land, etc. We have to understand that the principle of property extends beyond that. It is not some "capitalist" ideal, it's inherent. You cannot be aligned with objective morality or understand Rights without understanding this principle, and it's very simple. You rightfully own something if:
​
a) You acquired it without harming others
b) You didn't steal it
c) You are in exclusive control of it
d) You are exclusively responsible for how it is used
Therefore:
​
Your Life is your property.
Your Rights are your property.
Your Freedom is your property.
Your Body is your property.
Your Mind is your property.
Your Physical Belongings are your property (if rightfully acquired).
​
With that understanding, a Right can be defined as:
​
Any action one is capable of taking that does not cause harm to another sentient being or that being's property.
That's all it is and all it ever has been, and all human beings have the exact same Rights inherently. They are not bestowed upon us by other people. We all have the Right to travel, for example. If you own a vehicle and want to take a trip to a corner store or another state, you have the Right to do so without restriction. If you wanted to travel overseas, you have the Right to do so without restriction. That means no licenses, no passports, no registrations. We don't need permission from any other being to exercise that Right, because Rights do not come from other people, we're born with them. Anyone trying to prevent us from exercising a Right without meeting their "legal" criteria is making a claim of ownership on you.
​
The first and foremost Right of all human beings is the Right to be left alone.
For a wrong-doing to take place, a living being or their property must have been harmed or damaged. That would be a violation of Natural Law. Any action you are capable of taking that isn't causing harm to another is a Right. Period. No victim, no crime. This is a fundamental crux of Natural Law. Right behavior versus Wrong behavior. Morality versus Immorality. Who are the biggest perpetrators of theft and harm? Government and "Authority." Such people do not and never have had the moral "right" to command and rule everyone else. That's called slavery.
​
Natural Law can therefore be simplified into two words:
​
DON'T STEAL. Don't steal someone's life, well-being, sexual autonomy, physical property, security, free will, rights, or freedom. And don't steal the truth from them through malicious lying.
​
If you do not understand this and say "I don't believe in property," then you'll probably allow anyone to do anything they want to you and take whatever they want from you; and you most likely believe that you can impose the same violence and coercion on others, as well. It's that immoral behavior that got us to where we are now. Go back to those principles of ownership above and really contemplate on them.
​
BEING OFFENDED / FREE SPEECH
​
Emotional upset doesn't count as a Natural Law transgression. Sorry. That uncomfortable feeling is something that happens internally. You alone have control over how you feel. Whether you recognize it or not, being offended is a choice you make. To let someone else's words affect you this way is something YOU are doing to yourself. It's a choice rooted in emotional immaturity. It's rooted in internal issues that you haven't worked through and healed.
If someone is upset or offended by something I've said, I haven't caused harm to their body, property, rights or freedom. They still have the Right to ignore me, to stop listening to me, or to stop reading my words. When someone's actions impose upon the Rights and Free Will of another, that is when harm has been done. Emotional upset is something that YOU have to work through and overcome like a mature adult. No one else is responsible for that.
Everyone has the Right to speak, but that doesn't mean we have the right to force someone to listen to us. We certainly do not have the right to force someone to stop speaking just because we disagree with them. Threats, however, are not protected speech. If someone's words are expressing a clear intent to enact violence on another being, that can be considered immoral speech, and their Rights could end up pending until they rescind the threat.
​
SELF-HARM
Self-harm is a right. It's not very smart, but it's still a right. If you want to inject heroin into your veins, that is your right. If you want to drink drain cleaner, that is your right. That doesn't mean it's wise or healthy to do such a thing, but your body is your property. You have the Right to do whatever you want to it. I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't try to peacefully influence someone to not harm themselves, only that they have the right to do so.
Anyone who uses violence and coercion to stop you from any Rightful action (like government does every day) is ultimately making a claim of ownership on your body which they do not have the "right" to do. Why do you think attempted suicide is considered a crime? Because government sees you as property, and they don't want you destroying their property.
​
The same could be said about consciousness-altering compounds like entheogens (cannabis, DMT, psilocybin, etc). Your mind is your property, therefore you have the Right to experiment with your consciousness as you see fit. No one else has the "right" to stop you because that would be considered a claim of ownership over your mind and body which belongs to you and you alone.
​
BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS & ENTITLEMENT
While every single human being has the Right to have food, shelter, and everything else that comes with freedom, that doesn't mean you are entitled to those things by others. Just because you have those Rights doesn't mean other people are obligated to provide you with basic necessities. It means you have the right to acquire those things without restraint, restriction, or duress. The only thing other people are obligated to do is to not infringe upon those Rights. No one owes you anything. Freedom is about personal responsibility. When you believe that other people must provide you with what you need, you are basically saying "other people are my slaves," and that's immoral. You are entitled only to what YOU create.
Also, dependency on government for your basic needs (with money stolen from others through taxation) is no different than a child depending on its parents. That isn't the mentality of a mature, responsible adult. You and you alone are responsible for your needs. If you want to create a mutually agreed upon charity fund for those who cannot provide for themselves due to illness or disability, that's perfectly fine. That's voluntaryism. That's morally correct. Taking resources from others without their consent or through coercion to fund that program is and always will be theft regardless of the good intentions you may claim to have.
​
The biggest reason we have things like homelessness and poverty isn't lack of resources, it is the existence of "government." Scarcity isn't a natural occurrence, it's manufactured.
​
Scarcity = Dependency
Dependency = Control
​
The level of abundance and availability of housing would skyrocket when we stop condoning this system and allowing it to interfere with charitable causes. Government is anti-human and anti-freedom in every possible way. Government is slavery. It needs to be abolished.
WHERE DO RIGHTS COME FROM?
THEY ARE INHERENT
Most people tend to believe that Rights come from government, or from a document such as the Bill Of Rights, or that they are socially decided upon. This is incorrect. Rights come from Creation itself, from Nature. They are our birthright. They do not come from other human beings.
No human being – not you, not me, or anyone else – can create Rights, legitimately delegate Rights to someone else, or take Rights away from someone else. People can make claims that they can do these things, and even act on those claims, but that doesn't make them true, valid, or binding in reality. We don't get to decide for ourselves or for anyone else what Right and Wrong are, we have to discover what Right and Wrong are in Nature and then align our behavior to that knowledge by an act of our will.
Again, the Bill Of Rights does not grant human beings their Rights, it is only a declaration of some of them. You cannot write down on a piece of paper what you or anyone else has a right to do and make it so. If I wrote down "I have the right to take 10% of your earnings once a month," and had a bunch of my friends sign it to "make it official," you'd say I was out of my mind; yet that's exactly what some men did in 1789. They illegitimately granted themselves and their colleagues "rights," and then imposed that onto the rest of us. They falsely delegated to a body of individuals called Congress the "right" to collect taxes from people. In other words, the "right" to forcibly steal the product of our labor. Theft of any kind is immoral, and no immoral action can be justified (made into a Right) no matter how seemingly noble the cause or how good the intention. The end does not justify the means when the means are immoral. Theft is theft, and can never be a Right.
CULTURE / EQUALITY UNDER NATURAL LAW
​
Every human being on Earth has the exact same Rights under Natural Law. It doesn't matter what race or ethnicity someone is, what their sexuality is, what their social status is, etc. We all come into this realm with the same Rights. They are inherent. We are Sovereign beings. Unfortunately, we've been duped into believing otherwise. We've been conditioned to believe in the myth of "authority," that there is moral legitimacy to government, and that some people have more Rights than others, but this is a deception.
​
Most people still don't understand this, including so-called "pro-freedom" people. They have bought into the notion of "illegal immigrants." There is no such thing as an "illegal" human being. This notion is based on the belief in the legitimacy of man's "laws," as well as the "ME ME ME" mentality. To prevent any sovereign being from crossing an invisible line called a "border" is an infringement on their natural Right to travel and live where they choose. If someone enters another person's private domain without consent, then that's called Trespassing, but an entire continent is not private property, nor is it collectively owned. Collective ownership does not exist. Every human being has the Right to move across the earth unrestrained and make a home for themselves.
We have to differentiate between forced immigration (aka forced association) by governments who push certain cultures into other areas for the purpose of disruption, and the Natural Right of travel and habitation of all sovereign beings. We have to stop thinking one-dimensionally about this and equating the two.
We also need to de-program ourselves from the whole idea of culture. That doesn't mean stripping away traditions (unless those traditions are harmful), but clinging to culture is nothing more than collective ego-identity. Break the word down using green language. When you look at the phonetics of the word, what does it reveal?
​
CULT-URE
CULT-YOUR
YOUR CULT
​
The purpose of culture is to socially condition you into adopting certain beliefs, attitudes and behaviors which align with the control system (i.e. popularity, norms, fads, taboos, social expectations, etc). It claims dominion over your mind, over your sense of self. Its "authority" is backed by coercion via judgment, bullying, ostracization, shaming, and mob rule. It's rooted in collectivism and conformity and in the false "greater good" where the needs of the many outweigh the needs (and especially the rights) of the individual. The true greater good is based in Natural Law. It is to recognize and respect the Freedom and Rights of both the individual and the whole.
​
When you're a member of a cult you will obsessively defend and preserve the rituals, practices, beliefs and comforts of that cult at the expense of the rights and freedom of non-members. You do not recognize the natural sovereignty and inherent rights of anyone who isn't in your cult. That's the Us-Vs-Them, "MY freedom, MY comfort, screw everyone else" mindset, dismissing the Freedom and Rights of others as if they had none to begin with which is antithesis to True Freedom.
“Ego is a structure that is erected by a neurotic individual who is a member of a neurotic culture against the facts of the matter. And culture, which we put on like an overcoat, is the collectivized consensus about what sort of neurotic behaviors are acceptable.” ― Terence McKenna
​
“Culture is not your friend. Culture is for other peoples’ convenience and the convenience of various institutions, churches, companies, tax collection schemes, what have you. It is not your friend. It insults you. It disempowers you. It uses and abuses you. None of us are well-treated by culture… It invites people to diminish themselves and dehumanize themselves by behaving like machines.” – ibid.
We are ALL equal in our Rights under Natural Law (God's Law, Universal Law, Cosmic Law, etc). To infringe upon the Rights of another (such as putting up razor wiring along a state border) just to maintain your comfort or cultural attachments is not moral behavior. This is coming from a place of fear. Remember the Natural Law Expressions? When you're in a state of fear it's because you are in ignorance of truth with no understanding of your own sovereignty (and therefore the sovereignty of others). When you're in that state of fear, ignorance and internal confusion, what results? The desire to control. And when the bulk of humanity is in that mindset, what results? Suffering and chaos.
If you ever have a problem with understanding if something is a Right or not, imagine a world with only two people on it. If Person A does not have the "right" to assault, steal from, murder, or infringe upon any other Right belonging to Person B, then Person B doesn't have the"right" to assault, steal from, murder or infringe upon the Rights of Person A. Those actions are eternally Wrong, whether there are only two people on the planet or 10 billion. All of our Rights are the same, regardless of population size, and we are all bound by the same Laws of Morality.
​
THE RIGHT OF SELF-DEFENSE
If we violate Natural Law by assaulting someone, our Right to safety becomes forfeit as the victim has the Right to employ the Self-Defense Principle, to end that state of duress using defensive force (up to and including deadly force if necessary). It doesn't matter who the person is that is initiating violence, what costume they're wearing, or what "authority" they claim to have. That "authority" is not a justification for immoral behavior because no such thing exists. It's only a belief system. Violence is ALWAYS Wrong – whether it's physical violence or any other Natural Law transgression – and we always have the Right to put a stop to it. Violence and the use of defensive force to stop violence are NOT the same thing, they are diametrically opposed.
​
Some argue that protecting one's physical property from theft by a thug has to do with being so ego-attached to the material property that you'd use "violence" to protect it. NO. The thug has such an egoic attachment to materialistic things that they would engage in violence and put your life at risk to attain it. Your response to that violence is not violence. It is the use of necessary defensive force which we all have the Right to employ. By standing down and relinquishing your property without defense is only enabling their behavior. This applies to "legal" theft, as well, or any other form of violence and duress.
We are ALL currently under a constant state of duress by psychopathic thugs claiming to be "authority" and "government," and we ALL have the Right to end it – to end Slavery – because that's what being under constant duress is. It is violence and the constant threat of violence if we do not obey the commands of those claiming to be our masters.
If people stopped thinking they have no Right to defend themselves from those who oppress them just because they wear badges and uniforms, tyrannies wouldn't happen. And what goes hand-in-hand with the belief in "authority?" Moral Relativism. When you have no understanding of Objective Morality and no understanding of Rights then you do not have Conscience. If you don't have Conscience then you will make justification after justification for immoral things that are done by those you perceive as "authority," and never take a stand against it. When aggregate society doesn't take that stand, Natural Law brings down the consequences which is more and more suffering and slavery. It's really that simple.
To sum up...
Rights cannot be made into Wrongs, and Wrongs cannot be made into Rights. They cannot be taken away nor can they be delegated. They are eternal and fixed. Any man-made "law" that would prohibit you from any Natural Right is immoral and illegitimate. Such "laws" are only the whims of mortal men and women who do not and will never have the "right" to rule any human being ever. Any individual who would enforce the infringement of those Rights has forfeit their own, and you have the Right to employ the Self-Defense Principle in response.
The only binding Law in this Universe is Natural Law. We're breaking it every single day through behaviors which we do not have the "right" to do, and slavery is our consequence. It's the Law of Correspondence: what we do to others will be done unto us. As above, so below. If we behave as if we have a "rightful" claim over other people's Property, Rights, and Freedom then the same will be done to us on an even larger scale, and that is exactly what is happening today. As morality declines, freedom declines. If we want peace and freedom, we have to reverse that dynamic.