I'm simply wondering how you can argue that the right to economic freedom supersedes other rights (e.g. right to free speech).


That would depend on your philosophy, wouldn't it? A religious person would probably claim that these rights are given to man by God, whereas someone less inclined to metaphysics might claim that rights exist only insofar as one possesses the power of self-determinance.

Your last question is a simple reversal of my question, so I don't consider it particularly valid. I'm simply wondering how you justify a worldview that places "[the right] to food, shelter, health or health care, or clothing or employment" as mere subsidiary rights of "what he or she can obtain through an exchange of goods or services."

What, in short, is your rationale for the sole existence of the right to economic freedom when you discard the existence of other postulated rights that are declared equally intrinsic to the human condition and thus originate from the same source?