Even then it's still a ridiculous violation of human rights.

If that were true then it would be illegal. Learn the fact that human rights is a highly subjective term.

Bill of Rights. Also: [quote]Egypt, Rome, Sparta, Aztecs, Mongolia[/quote] Those civilizations fell and died off, it explains a LOT. When the lower class outnumbers the upper class 10 to 1 and someone decides enough's enough, that's the starting point of a new era.

Their ancient; of course they fell off and died. How about I use a modern example like China or the United Arab Emirates who violet human rights to get things done fast and effectively? The Burj Khalifa was built in about 6 years. If we used American standards it would take over a decade and a half to build that. China, surpased our economy by violating human rights, so the claim that it doesn't get anything done is very false. And since when did the lower class outnumber the upper class by 10 to 1 in any of those civilizations?

Where do you get your news from? Hong Kong is more capitalistic than America. Hm, maybe I can direct you to this link. It shows the expansion of a kingdom from beginning to its end. Aztecs? Their slaves as well as the Conquistadores and their allies took them down. Rome, their kingdom got too large to manage, split off. And it's called ambition. America isn't the most ambitious country in the world. We're also one of the few countries that adopted John Locke's idea of Life, Liberty and Property. Not every country adopted that idea.

None of what you said is remotely relevant to what we are discussing. Nobody said hong king wasn't capitalist. Nor does your assertions about the Aztecs make any sense in this context. Your last statement is laughably irrelevant as well. It's obvious you're desperate to argue and make it seem like you're intelligent after I disproved the moronic things you said in the other thread. I think I'm going to mute you, because all you will do is continue to waste my time.

You misinterpreted my post. You're arguing that the government body is able to complete various tasks much more effectively using methods that violate human rights, such as enslaving various classes of their population. I'm not going to disagree with that. I was referring to society, which includes every living person that are victims of the government's tyranny. The society itself isn't working correctly when they are enslaved, tortured, or killed, only the top social class is functioning correctly . The Burj Khalifa was the result of an effective government, not an effective society. Architectural advancement is just a grain of sand on the beach when it comes to meeting the maximum value for society.

In order for a society to function properly and optimally, certain rights must be established. Ending people's lives against their will is a violation of one of these rights. The reason that a right to life is one of those rights is because in order for a society to work, people must cooperate, and they must have incentive to cooperate and produce the maximum possible value for others. Under the threat of ending their lives, however, people cannot work optimally and by their own rational judgement, so that's bad. In general, people can't achieve maximum value for themselves and others under the threat of force, especially when ending the lives of others against their will.