I disagree with that point. Human beings already have universal rights, and most states protect them. But no state can grant or take away your rights; only respect or abuse them.

That being said I still agree with your central thesis. Laws are just societal norms that have put down on paper. I wouldn't go so far as to argue for/against strong property rights either, although some people on this forum might.


The girl with 50 gp is a bad example because that would essentially be a selective head tax, which are generally frowned upon by society at large. Taxing some gold while she engages in state-protected commerce is a whole different story; she never agreed to the tax, but her purchases are partially enabled by the people around her and she was aware of local taxes when she decided to spend her gold there. So I'd consider the arbitrary seizure of her gold to be far worse than most real-life taxes.