NationStates Jolt Archive

Nota bene: Newbie alert, OK... So be kind to me!

I've just joined the UN, had a look through the various threads and have had a bit of a look at existing proposals.

I see lots of debates about prostitution, rights of sexual orientation, recreational drug use etc

To me, all these debates could, in principle, be rolled into one single policy - the inalienable right of individuals of adult reasoning to engage in self-regarding acts, and the inalienable right of such individuals to engage in consensual acts.

Surely a resolution of such effect would radically reduce the bandwidth usage and signal/noise ratios over what is effectively a debate about the same principle?

Regards,


Lev Lafayette

Newbies don't get protection. Same with members who have been here awhile.

You going to post your proposal, or do I assume it says "Moo oink squee squee" and advise against it? Generally, we prefer you to post it here.

Moo oink squee squee

DLE, don't you usually save that for your response?

DLE, don't you usually save that for your response?

Depends on the arguement.

I think he's got it hotkeyed. :p

It's the M.O.S.S. reply.

Depends how you define "consensual". Because in one stroke, you could with this be eliminating all our workers' rights laws, on the grounds that workers can freely make their own agreements with employers - something the libertarians would love no doubt, but we tend to regard a lot of technically consensual employment agreements as essentially exploitative in nature, because in most cases the individual worker needs that specific employment much more than the employer needs that specific worker, so an unrestrained employer could get away with unreasonably low wages, long hours and poor conditions.

DLE, don't you usually save that for your response?
Can we stop the ad hominem posts that have nothing to do with the subject at hand?

Unfree People
Forum Moderator

Depends how you define "consensual". Because in one stroke, you could with this be eliminating all our workers' rights laws, on the grounds that workers can freely make their own agreements with employers - something the libertarians would love no doubt, but we tend to regard a lot of technically consensual employment agreements as essentially exploitative in nature, because in most cases the individual worker needs that specific employment much more than the employer needs that specific worker, so an unrestrained employer could get away with unreasonably low wages, long hours and poor conditions.

Good point, and one which I had considered. ;-)

In order to make a free choice one has to be in free conditions, i.e., without physico-biological coercion, in the first instance, which strictly implies a minimum level of social welfare and education (you can't freely choose unless you know what you are choosing). Otherwise you are quite right, one would quickly end up with David Ricardo's "Iron Law of Wages" applying in no time!

I would like "libertarians" a lot more if they actually checked up (a) what laissez-faire actually means (and no, it does not mean "leave alone") and (b) checked up what the conditions of a free market actually are.

That said, the geolibertarians, who advocate resource rents and a citizen's dividend, seem to be pretty sensible people.

Well, the inalienable right for self-regarding acts is GREAT. Legalize suicide, and then we'd get the euthanasia thing knocked out. Would also legalize drugs, and get that out of the way. (No sarcasm by the way... i know it's hard sometimes to tell the tone on these internet posts.)

The consensual thing, I think is also a good idea. However, that's a bit more complex in that you could exploit it in certain areas. So i think you may have to maybe set some limits on that.

Great concept, though. Post a formal proposal draft (in here) whenever you can.

Good point, and one which I had considered. ;-)

In order to make a free choice one has to be in free conditions, i.e., without physico-biological coercion, in the first instance, which strictly implies a minimum level of social welfare and education (you can't freely choose unless you know what you are choosing). Otherwise you are quite right, one would quickly end up with David Ricardo's "Iron Law of Wages" applying in no time!

I would like "libertarians" a lot more if they actually checked up (a) what laissez-faire actually means (and no, it does not mean "leave alone") and (b) checked up what the conditions of a free market actually are.

That said, the geolibertarians, who advocate resource rents and a citizen's dividend, seem to be pretty sensible people.

I'm not familiar with David Ricardo. But anyways, looks like you want the same kind of thing as me :)

I think whatever text you draft for a proposal on such a wide-ranging principle is going to need to be pored over very carefully on this forum before you submit it, because there's a lot of scope for minor wording issues doing things you didn't want to do, not least with this whole employment thing.

BTW I recommend taking a look at Sophista's guide to proposal writing at http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=342360 before you start writing. Good luck!


Hey, just realised - drugs legalisation doesn't usually get enough support in the NSUN, but if it's under the cover of a catch-all, feel-good "we love freedom" proposal, we might manage to get it through!