Of course, I'm fairly sure that could be argued to abolish things like private property, but it's at least there and intelligible, if not realistic.
And that's the thing. If taken literally, the whole argument could result in gridlock because one person's pursuit of happiness might infringe on another's, and so on, and so on, spiraling down into minutiae so that in the end all we are able to do is stand stock-still and look at each other. Yes, it's an exaggerated example, but theoretically, it could happen. The whole idea could backfire on itself so that nobody is able to pursue anything.
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 5/4/10 17:19 (UTC)And that's the thing. If taken literally, the whole argument could result in gridlock because one person's pursuit of happiness might infringe on another's, and so on, and so on, spiraling down into minutiae so that in the end all we are able to do is stand stock-still and look at each other. Yes, it's an exaggerated example, but theoretically, it could happen. The whole idea could backfire on itself so that nobody is able to pursue anything.