In response to Professor McPherson’s remarks outlined in “History still important today (11/30)” and how the American Civil War provided an important shift away from negative liberty, I found he may not have meant to voice support for this shift, but his words seemed to reflect that position.
The problem with the advocates of positive liberty is they root their ideas within that of collective rights.
This leaves a free society in danger of submitting itself to authoritative rule within a collectivist society.
A good example of this would be Soviet Russia and their twist on positive liberty.
The best way for the attainment of positive rights would be recognition by man/society of natural law, which is rooted within negative liberty.
When the state legislates rights, it holds more control on its people, and though at first the legislation may be deemed good, eventually the state will eventually determine all the rights man may have.
Professor McPherson’s analogy of the sheep, wolf and shepherd fails to point out the reality of a wolf in shepherd’s clothing.
When given the opportunity, the shepherd will take the sheep and shear and slaughter it for all it’s worth.
Michael Melendez
Fullerton, Calif.
