If I were to ask people to finish the sentence, I am convinced many of them would say "nothing". But would they be correct? I'm going to argue that the answer is 'No'. That simply is because that is not how our societies work. However, when arguing with people on twitter, you might come across a lot of people who think differently.
Because Newton said so
I understand that claiming that people owe you something, or that you owe them something, might come a cross as somewhat of a strong claim that needs to be explained. But when one looks at how our societies work, then this should all be self explanatory, should it not?
Humans are a social species. Living together in large groups has significant benefits. This is undeniably true. If you look at it from a neanderthals perspective it makes a lot of sense. Living in groups makes it easier to gain resources like food. Its easier to make a shelter and protect ones self from threats and... living in groups makes it easier to find a mate to reproduce with. These benefits have not changed. But... there's a catch.
Newton's 3rd law also applies in a social sense. Each action is expected to have an equal and opposite reaction. Yep... I'm talking about reciprosity. If I do something for you, to help you, then I expect you to help me in an equal way when I need it. Tit for tat. If you don't, then you either need to (pre)pay for my services or you won't be provided any services anymore. This system for restitution is commonly used in all societies, in all kinds of ways. It's a social agreement, where exchanges of favors lead to debts and people owing eachother favors, goods, services or money to some extend.
You can't violate my rights! (because I'm selfish)
Many people mistakenly think their rights are inalienable. With that, they conveniently forget that, if that were the case, societies would not be able to function. If everyone has inalienable rights, then as soon as a situation arises in which peoples rights come in conflict with eachother, a stalemate occurs in which no further action is possible.
Let's says you're driving and arrive at a bridge, which is only wide enough for one car to pass at a time. From the other side, at the same time there's also a car arrving at the bridge. If both of you have an equal right of way and drive on, you'll both have to stop at the middle of the bridge and neither will be able to cross. This means someone has to compromise and let the other pass first.
You reach an agreement, but on the way back the samething happens with the same driver. Again there is a stalemate and again a compromise has to be made. According to social rule, the person who compromised the first time, would now go first. This way both drivers would have crossed the bridge first once. It would 'even the score' and this would be perceived as being fair.
If this solution isn't reached, the driver who got to cross the bridge first at the previous 2 occassions shouldn't expect the other driver to compromise a 3rd time, as they then already compromised twice, where the other hadn't compromised. This response in to be expected, especially when we're supposed to have equal rights and when we act based on reciprosity. Unfortunately we see many people being egotistical ad refuse to compromise. They only care about their own rights and not about anyone else's.
The recent Covid pandemic gave us a lot of examples of this. When the virus first spread measures were taken to slow it down. The reason for this was to stop hospitals from being overwhelmed with patients and to allow for the best care possible. The best way to stop the spread of a respiratory virus is to stop people from being in close contact.
So, measures like 'social distancing' and wearing facemasks were implemented. Much to the dismay of a lot of people. What they seem to miss, however, is that these measures were put in place to protect the rights and wellbeing of everyone as good as possible.
Look at the maskmandates and social distantancing in supermarkets for example. People found that mandatory maskwearing violated their rights. (Let's forget that they also, mandatory, wore clothes) Well, here the assessment was made for the greater good. The wellbeing of society.
The social thing to do, is to assess the situation and all parties involved compromise on their own rights, to a degree they all are satisfied with, in order to move on. With the pandemic however, we saw that many people were unwilling to accommodate others and their rights, where those others were willing to compromise their own rights. People wore facemasks and held a social distance, in order to keep others safe. Unfortunately some of those others did not return the favor.
Their argument? "You can't violate my rights" and "I don't owe you anything". Both of these arguments go against the common social rule, where we all have equal rights and we all equally compromise, when there is a conflict between eachothers rights. People conveniently forgot that this is mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
In article 29.2 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is very clear. it basically says: "To lay any claim on our own rights, we must also acknowledge and respect the rights of others. For the others to lay claim on their rights, they must also acknowledge and respect ours". When these rights conflict, then a compromise needs to be made and we can't be selfish.
We all have the 'right' to go to the grocery store and buy our food. But when there's a healthrisk when doing so, as with the covid pandemic, there is a duty we have toward eachother, to not risk eachothers health any more than needed. So, when this means to wear a face mask and keep a safe distance from others, then that is what you're obligated to do.
Since we al have equal rights and we all act based up on reciprosity, we do all have duties toward eachother. If I respect your rights, you owe me the same respect. If you can't muster any respect for the rights of others, then you shouldn't expect anyone to respect yours. If we want to make our societies, work, then we owe it to eachother to respect eachothers rights and act up on that.
Comments