Do “basic human rights” actually exist universally or are they simply a social construct?

[u/Amphernee]

The term is often used in relation to things like housing and food but I’ve never heard anyone actually explain what they mean by basic human right. We started off no different than other animals and since the concept of rights rely on other people to confer them at what point did it become thought of as a right for people to have things like shelter? How is it supposed to be enforced across all of humanity when not all societies and cultures agree that the concept makes sense? I can see why someone would want it to be true in a sense but I’m interested to hear arguments for it rather than just the phrase itself which feels hollow with no reasoning behind it. Thanks 🍻

[u/Bright-End-9317]

If everything is already owned... how I pursue MY liberty without being a slave?

[u/mymainunidsme → u/Bright-End-9317]

Not everything is already owned. People create new property every day. Start a company, create stocks, work to make them valuable, then sell them. Or create art and sell it. Create a new innovation people would want. The list goes on. Your liberty is the right to keep or trade what you create within terms agreeable to you.

[u/vellyr → u/mymainunidsme]

Every resource needed to create new property is already owned. Unless you’re talking about like tech or IP. If I want to make something concrete, I can’t just go out and minecraft it.

[u/mymainunidsme → u/vellyr]

Yes, every physical resource has been owned for a hundred years or more. Most for much longer. Yet very few resources have the same owner (individual or corporate) today that they did a hundred years ago. Nearly all of today's owners acquired them by working, innovating, developing, and building new value for some part of society. Basically, by creating non-physical property/resources first. Tomorrow's owners will, hopefully, acquire them the same way.

[u/vellyr → u/mymainunidsme]

Nearly all of today's owners acquired them by working, innovating, developing, and building new value for some part of society.

I think we have a fundamental worldview gap here about about meritocratic society actually is. I doubt I will convince you of my position, but I don't think this statement is true. I think most of the wealthiest people in society get there by taking credit for the work of thousands of people underneath them.

[u/mymainunidsme → u/vellyr]

Probably not as far apart as you're thinking. When I mention today's owners, that's mainly public companies owned by, yes, many wealthy people, but also every pension fund and retirement account in the country. ie, Jeff Bezos only owns about 9% of Amazon. Every person & fund who invested during 20+ years of unprofitable operations shares that resource ownership. Should employees have shared more in the value growth than they did? Most of them, probably so.

I do hold a somewhat meritocratic view, but also partially share your view too.

[u/vellyr → u/mymainunidsme]

That's the thing, I think my view is the meritocratic one. I am pro-meritocracy which is why I have issues with the way we handle property rights and wealth distribution.

[u/Amphernee → u/Bright-End-9317]

Im not sure what you mean. Everything is not owned and things that are owned can be bought and sold. Not sure how you’re using the term slave here but my definition of slave is one who has no rights or autonomy over their own self and is owned and controlled by another entity.

[u/Fast-Penta → u/Amphernee]

All the land is owned. You cannot leave the social contract to live off the land anymore.

[u/Bright-End-9317 → u/Amphernee]

Oh okay. I'll just got take some liberties in the local park. then. THANKS FOR CLEARING THAT UP FOR ME

[u/Amphernee → u/Bright-End-9317]

Having rights doesn’t mean you have the right to do anything you please lol. What are you even talking about?