frd writes:
“First of all your implication that some dark sordid event in my past causes me to hate rich people is simply foolish. Suffice it to say that I was able to retire and live in what some would call a very high life style in my fifties….If a murderer shoots you to death, your prior statements have led us to the point that you, not having been able to protect yourself,have forfeited your right to life. Since you do not have a right to life, has a crime been committed?”
I of course have said nothing of the kind. In fact, quite the opposite point has been made. Frd needs to read much more carefully.
Rights are inalienable. They are not “granted”. They cannot be forfeited. The fact that you shoot and kill me does not in any way imply that my right to life has been forfeited. The right still exists, even though you have infringed upon it and interferred with it.
I congratulate frd for his early financial successes, that have enabled him to enjoy life in the manner to which most would like to become accustomed.
Poverty, however, is not required for attitudes of anger, antipathy, and covetousness to exist in some toward the wealth and property of others.
Perhaps it is a sense of guilt (affluenza), or the fact that since so much of what he has earned and accumulated is being (and has been) confiscated from HIM, then it is only appropriate to spread the misery around as much as possible.
Instead, why not oppose the injustice of the confiscation in the first place?
The story of frd’s early success could be quite instructive, if the causes for his anger and bitterness could be avoided.
