Niko Maheras
Do humans have the right to initiate violence against other humans who have not done anything to deserve that aggression? Barring psychopaths, most sensible people would say no. This is the objectively right, factually right, and morally right answer. Humans DO NOT have the right to initiate violence against others. (To clarify, humans DO have the right to defend themselves against aggressors, which is vastly different than initiating violence.)
Since humans do not have the right to perform an action that violates others, can the action become a right if they delegate it to someone else? I.e., tell someone else to do it for them. No. Let us look at some examples to contextualize this truth.
John, Nick, and George will serve as our actors in the following scenarios.
Scenario 1
Suppose John goes to Nick’s house and demands Nick give him 50% of his earnings every week for the rest of his life. If Nick refuses, John will threaten him, using a gun, and lock him in a cage. To anyone with a brain, John does not have this right and is acting incorrectly and immorally. That is not an opinion, and if you do not understand why, read “Moral Relativism Is a Lie”. Nick would be in the right and justified if he used a gun to defend himself and tell John to get off his property. Now, what if John told George to do the action for him? Does that now make it morally right? Absolutely not. Since John never had the right to do so, neither does George. Delegating an imagined right of ownership to someone else’s property does not make it a right.
Scenario 2
What if Nick believes George has amassed a collection of weapons (guns, harpoons, and rocket launchers), but George has done no harm? No one has proof of George possessing this other than Nick’s belief (belief is not proof). Does Nick have the right to invade George’s home and destroy his property to verify his claim? Of course not. Even if there was definitive proof George had an armament, George has not aggressed anyone, and therefore has done nothing wrong. Possessing property is never a crime. In fact, it is always a right to do so (unless it was acquired by violating someone else’s rights). If Nick tasked John to invade George’s home and destroy his property based on this belief, would this delegation make the action morally right? No.
Scenario 3
George does not like people smoking anything (tobacco, meth, marijuana, etc.) and will hold people against their will in his basement if he catches anyone doing so. This is wrong and immoral since George cannot rightfully control what other people do to their bodies. People own their bodies, and anyone else claiming ownership of a body that is not theirs is enslaving that person. Would it be ok for George to have John hold people in his (John’s) basement on George’s behalf? Again, since George does not have the right to do that action himself, he cannot delegate it to John and have the action to become right.
If you caught on, the above scenarios either happened or are happening currently. Scenario 1 details a politician (John) delegating the act of theft to an IRS agent (George), and yet people will still choose not to acknowledge that as immoral. Scenario 2 was the imaginary weapons of mass destruction (WMD) claim by the George W. Bush administration and subsequent increased control of Iraq and the Middle East. Scenario 3 is the ongoing, pointless war on drugs and self-ownership.
Again, delegating actions which one does not have the right to do does not make them rights. However, because there is freewill, this delegation can be and has been done, but it is impossible for the delegation to make the actions suddenly morally right. Therefore, military, police, government, or anyone engaging in actions that do harm to or violate other sentient beings, are behaving immorally.
Immoral behaviors result in negative consequences, and if we are living in a world where immoral actions occur daily, the consequences are slavery and the suppression of freedom. Freedom in a society is directly proportional to a society’s morality.
Right action is NOT defined or made by man. It is defined by a universal creative intelligence (some call it God, energy, etc. labels are irrelevant), and it is our mission and responsibility to understand what actions are right and wrong, and then align our behaviors with them. If that is done, the consequences of our collective, morally right behaviors will result in greater prosperity and freedom.
The Power Within 