* Individual moral code: Rules that guarantee survival.
* Must be able to execute moral code in a social context.
* Other people exist and you must have a guarantee of the necessity of your survival in that social context.
The guarantee consists of the guranteed enforcement of an individualist body of law. You can't leave it to be optional to enforce individualist law. You can't have your rights be optional. You can't grant people the option to deal with you on collectivist terms. It's a matter of what laws they must deal with you under. When a dispute arises:
1. You must have certainty about what laws will apply.
2. You must have certainty that you can impose individualism on the counterparty.
The key thing here is that you need a guarantee that you can impose individualism on other people by force. How do we justify this claim to be able control other people? We justify it as self-defense: all individualist laws are defensive and not aggressive.
Why do we get to impose our particular legal system and to deny other people the right to impose their legal system on us? Because our lives matter. In particular: it's a producer-favouring legal system. We need to think about rights as being not merely for persons, but for producing persons.
We need to drill deeper into notions about how to deal with proportionate loss of rights for rights violators. The inductive link we're missing is: self-defense and the right of __producers__ to live. It's very important and particular: rights are for the preservation of producers; not for all persons.
Humans must live by production. Those persons who live by non-production are parasites. Parasites don't have rights. It's the interest of productive persons to banish parasites. [It seems we must talk about the parasites when discussing rights. Parasites are the link that enables us to explain why producers have a right to impose individualism on other people. You can't just move from the right to life without discussing the parasites who give them reason to create government: government exists because of the parasites. It doesn't exist because of the producers. It exists to enable producers to live among parasites. This is the link! The link is that the existence of parasites makes imposing individualism necessary.]
* In a sense, the urge to talk about all persons in a polity as being equally productive or non-violating is an attempt to appease people who don't like hearing violators be spoken of as having fewer rights. We have to find language that characterizes this both accurately and appeasingly.
