Robert Nozick Hopers Analysis

It’s the fundamentals of our Constitution that the federal system must stay rooted in because if we allow our government to create a more secure environment in terms of terrorism then their may be another instance where they tighten the reigns or provide support involuntarily. Although it is the government’s responsibility to protect the nation, there are vast amounts of complimentary obligations such as the protection of human rights, civil liberties, and basic freedoms. Therefore, the government’s

The statements by Sharon and Port Huron published in 1960 and 1962 respectively emphasize on the idea of defending the United States citizens. The two statements rely on the Declaration of Independence as the primary source of their arguments. The young authors present an opinion regarding the approach needed by the future government in addressing the future of the nation. However, despite the noted similarities, the two statements differ in regards to their conclusions as to how the U.S should continue protecting individual liberty. Although the two statements uphold the declaration, Sharon Statement supports the intentions of the founders about the U.S government with Port Huron Statement deviating from the original document by proposing further expansion of the federal government to ensure effective protection of individual freedom (Attack 282). The paper examines the two statements where the similarities and differences are captured.

Many citizens expect protection from threats foreign and domestic, and to do so in a

This idea of limiting the national government’s ability to invade on people’s rights, was reiterated

During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.

Specifically, Nozick’s theory of justice requires only that people refrain from acting in ways that interfere with others (lockean rights). He argues that we are not obligated to do anything for anyone else nor is anyone required to do anything positive for us. Not only are we forbidden from interfering with a person’s liberty to promote general good, we are prohibited from doing so even if violating an individual’s rights would prevent other individuals’ rights from being violated. Moreover, the theory of justice supports that people are entitled to their

In this essay I will be describing some key legislation that has been put in place to protect citizens’ rights within society.

Through this article, it has been displayed that people have a responsibility to protect the

The subject of how did the constitution create a strong government while limiting itspower and still protect the rights of the people has been covered intensively by the world pressover the past decade. In depth analysis of how did the constitution create a strong governmentwhile limiting its power and still protect the rights of the people can be an enriching experience. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, how did the constitution create astrong government while limiting its power and still protect the rights of the people is featuringmore and more in the ideals of the young and upwardly mobile. Inevitably feelings run deepamongst the upper echelons of progressive service sector organizations, whom I can say nomore about due to the legal restrictions. Complex though it is I shall now attempt to provide anexhaustive report on how did the constitution create a strong government while limiting itspower and still protect the rights of the people and its numerous industries.

The government of the United States takes the security of its Citizens very serious and this explains why security of USA Citizens home and abroad is their first line of duty. In the wake of 9/11 terrorism attack, the citizens were left questioning whether indeed the government was doing enough to protect them. On the same note, the Bush administration was shaken to the core that terrorist could advance that much into their soil. This formed the basis of various legislations and formation of special units with special powers to fight terrorism in and out of USA. However, some of these laws have brewed controversy among the Citizens it is supposed to protect. Some civil rights groups and liberal lawmakers are questioning the ability of these laws to be applied without hurting the Americans it is supposed to protect.

This article argues that there is a big difference between the government and the society. In this article, Thomas Paine illustrates that the people will be happier if they created their laws that guide them, rather than following the law of the government that is wicked towards them.

Although we live in a nation that places a premium value on personal freedom, it is also a nation whose population considers its own safety and welfare as paramount rights. This creates a need for some measure of public order. Such public order mechanisms are typically expressed in the form of laws. The laws of the United States are an attempt to balance the desire for individual freedoms with the desire for universal safety. (D'Augostino, 2008)

Philosophers have struggled with determining the proper role of government. In the absence of government and laws, people could do whatever they wanted, and some of them would try to slaughter others and steal their property. This is the state called anarchy. People have realized that the safety of the people and the country would be in jeopardy in such a state. Thus, it is necessary for a country to have a government and/or ruler. However, a ruler must not have absolute power nor lack authority. But the protection of the people and the country alone is not enough for a country to prosper. The property and the natural rights of the people and the government must also be protected. Thus, the proper role of government is to protect the

As part of his book, Anarchy, State and Utopia, Nozick puts forward his theory of the minimal state. He argues that individuals in a state of nature would voluntarily form protective agencies to ensure that their rights are effectively defended. Because of network effects and economies of scale, one of the agencies will eventually achieve a dominant position where it would have the right to suppress the activities of the other agencies. There is the need to suppress these activities because they would subject the clients of the dormant agency to the risk of rights violation. This prohibition will be effective provided the dominant agency compensates the disadvantaged parties by according them with the protection of their rights. After this has occurred there will be a single firm holding

Thesis Statement: “Citizens of this country should value the national security more than their privacy since it is concerned with a much larger group of people in order to protect our country from invaders, to maintain the survival of our country and to prevent airing of criticism of government.”