More Subjects
[Name of the Writer]
[Name of Instructor]
[Subject]
[Date]
Negative Rights
The political thinkers who basically classify distinct categories of rights, negative rights are those rights which are basically entitled to a person to be let alone in one or another manner. In this scenario, if a person has a negative right that person has full freedom to do some action or even if the person doesn't want to do anything then it is also completely in his hands. So the negative right's emphasis on the basic rights of the citizens to nonintervention on the part of the government. Negative rights may include but they are not limited to on what a person should do for a living, whether to own a luxurious car or not or even the right to purchase or sell a specific property, the right to freedom of speech and also the right to make his/her own decisions ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"Pv8nngGx","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Capone)","plainCitation":"(Capone)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1260,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/4C6u8dIT/items/456YZM44"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/4C6u8dIT/items/456YZM44"],"itemData":{"id":1260,"type":"chapter","title":"Negative Rights","container-title":"Encyclopedia of Global Justice","publisher":"Springer Netherlands","publisher-place":"Dordrecht","page":"749-750","source":"Springer Link","event-place":"Dordrecht","URL":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9160-5_338","ISBN":"978-1-4020-9160-5","note":"DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9160-5_338","language":"en","author":[{"family":"Capone","given":"Stephen F."}],"editor":[{"family":"Chatterjee","given":"Deen K."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Capone). On the other hand, positive rights require others, for instance, the government to provide an individual with a specific service or a good. The positive rights include the right to employment and also right to avail basic healthcare facilities. So it is safe to say that the positive rights place a positive duty on other people. It is important to note here that on a social level the positive and also negative rights are incompatible. For example, an individual cannot have the right to be free while still being forced to work for others.
In today's time, all government organizations and the United Nations as well have a combination of both positive and negative rights of freedom in their human rights. Built on negative rights, positive rights can exist within a society but this can exist in the form of voluntary solutions, for instance if an individual has health insurance then he/she is liable to medical care. Although the protection of negative rights is the priority responsibility of the state because without these rights the citizens will not understand that they are the true citizens of the country and also the government is serious in protecting their basic rights. Negative rights for instance, free speech is quite significant in a democratic country and without this, it will be easy for the stat to oppress the people because those who are in power can easily control the information, and most people do not want to be oppressed. In a society that has elections the groups that are in power can easily change over time. So if one political party suppress this basic rights then there are chances that the party will come into power and will repeat the same thing to the previous ruling power ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"2PTnqOYd","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Brennan)","plainCitation":"(Brennan)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1261,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/4C6u8dIT/items/BQVSEFQC"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/4C6u8dIT/items/BQVSEFQC"],"itemData":{"id":1261,"type":"article-journal","title":"State Constitutions and the Protection of Individual Rights","container-title":"Harvard Law Review","page":"489-504","volume":"90","issue":"3","source":"JSTOR","archive":"JSTOR","abstract":"[During the 1960's, as the Supreme Court expanded the measure of federal protection for individual rights, there was little need for litigants to rest their claims, or judges their decisions, on state constitutional grounds. In this Article, Mr. Justice Brennan argues that the trend of recent Supreme Court civil liberties decisions should prompt a reappraisal of that strategy. He particularly notes the numerous state courts which have already extended to their citizens, via state constitutions, greater protections than the Supreme Court has held are applicable under the federal Bill of Rights. Finally, he discusses, and applauds, the implications of this new state court activism for the structure of American federalism.]","DOI":"10.2307/1340334","ISSN":"0017-811X","author":[{"family":"Brennan","given":"William J."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1977"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Brennan). So that means that in any country protecting other people’s free speech is like protecting your own free speech. Also the by protecting the negative rights of the people the government is taking their confidence that even if their speech is against them, the government is always there to protect their rights and this boosts the confidence of their citizens on the stat.
Another reason why the government should protect the negative rights of a given society is that the people who cannot exercise their own basic rights often become rebels and they prefer to go against the government rather than being suppressed by the government. Which further leads to violence and as a result innocent lives are lost, business and homes of individuals get destroyed and the lives of the people uprooted. So by protecting everyone’s rights help to maintain peace, and keeping peace means that people have the freedom and also the ability to live their own life without their rights being violated by anyone. The protection of negative rights of a society and also its people makes the government capable to gain the confidence of its people and as a result, it will be able to govern the country even after completion of its term. Although protecting the negative rights should be a priority of government but it does not mean that the government should only protect the negative rights and do nothing about the positive rights. Because the negative rights of individuals provide a basis for the positive rights of society.
Positive rights like healthcare, education, providing employment opportunities are some of the rights which can be protected only by the government it is only in the hands and control of a government to provide all these opportunities to its people ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"QNH67UCw","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Fisher)","plainCitation":"(Fisher)","noteIndex":0},"citationItems":[{"id":1262,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/4C6u8dIT/items/8KNK35LF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/4C6u8dIT/items/8KNK35LF"],"itemData":{"id":1262,"type":"book","title":"Congress: Protecting Individual Rights","publisher":"University Press of Kansas","source":"JSTOR","archive":"JSTOR","abstract":"When asked which branch of government protects citizens' rights, we tend to think of the Supreme Court-stepping in to defend gay rights, for example, in the recent same-sex marriage case. But as constitutional scholar Louis Fisher reveals in his new book, this would be a mistake-and not just because a decision like the gay marriage ruling can be decided by the opinion of a single justice. Rather, we tend to judge the executive and judicial branches idealistically, while taking a more realistic view of the legislative, with its necessarily messier and more transparent workings. In <i>Congress</i> , Fisher highlights these biases as he measures the record of the three branches in protecting individual rights--and finds that Congress, far more than the president or the Supreme Court, has defended the rights of blacks, women, children, Native Americans, and religious liberty.After reviewing the constitutional principles that apply to all three branches of government, Fisher conducts us through a history of struggles over individual rights, showing how the court has frequently failed at many critical junctures where Congress has acted to protect rights. He identifies changes in the balance of power over time-a post-World War II transformation that has undermined the system of checks and balances the Framers designed to protect individuals in their aspiration for self-government. Without a strong, independent Congress, this book reminds us, our system would operate with two elected officers in the executive branch and none in the judiciary, a form of government best described as elitist-and one no one would deem democratic.In light of the history that unfolds here-and in view of a Congress widely decried as dysfunctional-Fisher proposes reforms that would strengthen not only the legislative branch's role in protecting individual rights under the Constitution, but also its standing in the democracy it serves.","URL":"https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1b4cx2q","ISBN":"978-0-7006-2211-5","shortTitle":"Congress","author":[{"family":"Fisher","given":"Louis"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2019",4,1]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Fisher). Lets suppose if a government is taking all the basic initiatives to protect the negative rights of its people like it is protecting their right to live their life, to own properties or cars but after protecting all these rights if the government is failed to provide the healthcare facilities then the population will suffer or if it fails to provide them education then the nation will be unable to develop because the state is unable to provide them with the quality education and as a result that country will be unable to compete with other countries and it will stay behind. Without enacting a law for positive rights it will be impossible to move forward as a nation. In order to fully develop as a nation, it is important to protect both positive and negative rights. Both of these rights are the fundamental basis for the development of a country although it is important to design laws in order to protect the negative rights but that is not enough, to fully develop as a nation it is also important to enact laws for the protection of the positive laws because both are important to make the people feel that they are equally important in their country and the government is taking all the important initiatives to protect their rights either they are positive or negative.
Work Cited
ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"uncited":[],"omitted":[],"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Brennan, William J. “State Constitutions and the Protection of Individual Rights.” Harvard Law Review, vol. 90, no. 3, 1977, pp. 489–504. JSTOR, JSTOR, doi:10.2307/1340334.
Capone, Stephen F. “Negative Rights.” Encyclopedia of Global Justice, edited by Deen K. Chatterjee, Springer Netherlands, 2011, pp. 749–50. Springer Link, doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9160-5_338.
Fisher, Louis. Congress: Protecting Individual Rights. University Press of Kansas, 2016. JSTOR, JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1b4cx2q.
More Subjects
Join our mailing list
© All Rights Reserved 2024