Assignment help

澳洲墨尔本留学生代写:批评态度

右翼自由主义者(尤其是诺齐克)认为,政府只应利用其权力维护自我所有权,保护个人财产。在权利正义理论中,诺齐克在他的正义理论中认为,“一个人的财产是公正的,如果他有权通过获得和转让正义的原则,或正义的矫正,来获得和转让。因此,他对罗尔斯关于公平和财富再分配的观点持批评态度。诺齐克认为,任何一个公正地获得某物的人不应该对其他个人负责。因此,举例来说,如果所有财产都归一个人所有,那么就不需要征税或采取任何行动。此外,通过威尔特·张伯伦的例子,诺齐克展示了平等是如何通过自由导致不平等的。这意味着人们一开始有完全的自由来做自己的选择,但后来他们选择放弃这种自由。因此,重新分配张伯伦或任何应得的财富是“对人民权利的侵犯”。然而,诺齐克所暗示的是对个人自身的不公正。如果一个人拥有一切,那么人们就会沦为奴隶,为那个拥有所有资源的人工作,他们就不会自由。社群主义者批评这种自由主义的“分配正义和个人权利(因为它)会让现代国家的公民彼此对立,从而助长孤立、疏离和冷漠,而不是致力于共同的公民事业”。[11]因此,社区意识和它为社会个体带来的自由消失了。自由意志主义只把个人权利看作是最重要的权利,这是行不通的,尤其是在多元社会的今天,这需要个人和政府都有责任和权利,而不仅仅是一个人谁声称他们得到了公正的东西。很难评估什么是正义,这是诺齐克论点的另一个局限性。人们很容易声称他们得到了公正的东西,即使他们没有。因此,一个社区的存在需要保证所有的个人自由,而不是有问题的个人权利。

澳洲墨尔本留学生代写:批评态度

Right Libertarians (and Nozick in particular) have argued that the government should only use its power to maintain self-ownership rights and to protect individuals’ property. In The Entitlement Theory of Justice, Nozick argues in his theory of justice, that “the holdings of a person are just if he is entitled to them by the principles of justice in acquisition and transfer, or by just rectification of justice.” [8] Hence, he is critical of Rawls’s idea of the redistribution of justice and wealth. [9] Nozick believes that anyone who earns something justly should not be held responsible for other individuals. Thus, if all property, for example, ends up with one person, then that does not call for taxation or any action. Furthermore, by using the Wilt Chamberlain example, Nozick shows how equality results into inequality through freedom. This means that people originally start by having complete freedom to make their own choices, but then they choose to give up that freedom. Thus, to redistribute Chamberlain’s or any justly earned wealth is a “violation of people’s rights.”However, what Nozick is implying is injustice to the individuals themselves. If one person owns everything, then people will be reduced to slaves and work for that one person who owns all the resources, and they will not be free. Communitarians have criticized this libertarian idea of “distributive justice and individual rights [because it] works to divide the citizens of the modern state against one another, thereby fostering isolation, alienation, and apathy rather than commitment to a common civic enterprise.” [11] Thus, the sense of community and the freedom that it entails for the individuals of the society disappears. Libertarianism only focuses on individual rights as being the most important ones, which does not work, especially in pluralistic societies today, which need both individuals and the government to have responsibilities and rights, and not just a focus on one individual who claims they obtained something justly. It is difficult to assess what is just, which is another limitation to Nozick’s argument. People can easily claim that they obtained something justly, even if they did not. Thus, a community needs to exist where all individual freedoms are guaranteed, instead of questionable individual rights.