“Inalienable Rights: Part I The Basic Argument” - what Nozick and Rothbard got wrong
https://www.ellerman.org/inalienable-rights-part-i-the-basic-argument/
“An inalienable right is a right that may not be ceded or transferred away even with the consent of the holders of the right. Any contract to alienate such a right would be an inherently invalid contract, and, vice-versa, a right such that any contract to alienate it was inherently invalid would thus be an inalienable right.”
A group of people is de facto responsible for a result if it is a purposeful result of their deliberate and intentional joint actions.
@minnix, that is the definition of de facto responsibility. It is meaningful concept outside of a legal context. Ellerman’s theory is a theory of how the legal system should operate. However, he does draw an equality between the tenet of imputation and the labor theory of property. I would recommend anyone interested to read his other work
@libertarianism
I don’t see how this relates to my comment regarding individual sovereignty or the existence of natural rights as an extension.