Only a few years after WWII, the whole world agreed upon human rights. On paper, we declared each individuals basic rights, and the idea was that each and every country would build their social and judicial systems upon this fundament.
Now, more than 60 years later, violation of human rights is still a huge problem. Both on the individual level, as people do not respect each others rights, as well as on the level of national systems that are not compliant with human rights.
Roughly speaking, violation of human rights can be divided into two main categories: The first would be violence that cannot be stopped because of a lack of judicial systems that penalize such violence – and this is especially the case for such systems that would prevent the establishment of national rules violating human rights, as well as a lack of judicial systems that penalize violence by authorities against citizens. The second is the establishment of social systems, based on human rights as found in articles 22 – 28 of the Declaration. And it is those, I would want to discuss in this article.
Why don’t we succeed in building social systems that uphold human rights? Theoretically, human rights should be the fundament of any ideology; an ideology that violates them is wrong. So it can’t be a matter of politics. Yet it is! It’s an excuse, politicians use a lot. Economic crisis, ‘we cannot pay for it anymore’. They are actually selling the public that it would be too expensive to maintain social systems based on human rights as found in articles 22 – 28.
So that way, all the good work that has been put into attempts to establish social systems based on human rights are broken to pieces. The gap between rich and poor increases, instead of getting smaller. While every economist easily could prove, social systems based on human rights are beneficial for a country’s economy. It can be proven both using economic theory and math, as well as showing it with statistics about the correlation between sound social welfare systems and prosperity as found in the world today. Those wise world leaders who made the Declaration of Human Rights weren’t exactly stupid when they did. (For that matter: Nor are religious scriptures; no matter what religion we take, simply stated, they all teach that taking good care of each other brings prosperity)
Let us not forget, that we are talking about RIGHTS. It isn’t a matter of charity to help the young, the old, the sick and the unemployed; it is a matter of fundamental RIGHTS. Food, shelter, education, health care, labour, those are not gifts from the rich to the poor; those are each and every individuals RIGHTS. Article 25.1 says: ‘Everyone has the RIGHT to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.’
Therefore, the European Commission for Human Rights says: ‘Social rights are fundamental rights; they should be protected at all times; especially in times of economic crisis.’
So we don’t have to prove again and again, that building sound social systems is good for an economy. We don’t have to defend those rights. We HAVE them; we just shouldn’t rest until all politicians are educated to respect them, so they use them as the fundament of all their programs. First requirement is that politicians actually know them; to my huge surprise many don’t! Second requirement is that they respect them; and to make them respect human rights, they have to understand this:
There is an economic reason why we shouldn’t want everybody to ‘just have some job’. It’s a well-known fact, that 80% of the work is being done by 20% of the workers. It is called the Pareto principle. As the Pareto principle is also true on the individual level, it means it is the quality of the actions of those 20% making the difference, not the quantity: The effective actions from those 20% are 16 times better than the effective actions from the other 80%. It’s very likely, those 20% are people that love their work. It’s therefore not very effective to make people work in jobs they hate; they will surely belong to the 80% that doesn’t contribute a lot. It’s better to have happy people at home than counterproductive people at work. And maybe, in the long run, this attitude would actually defy the Pareto principle, as people will have the opportunity to find out what they really like to do and do it, being effective in this new area of interest. It might lead to a new world, with beautiful buildings, arts and other things we now cannot dream of. That could be the result of trusting and respecting others right to development of their personality. As article 22 states: ‘Everyone……..is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.’
A painful question remains: How about the dirty work, duties nobody really likes to fulfill? To answer this question, maybe we should look back, and see how we ourselves created them, instead of preventing such duties to ever arise. Or instead of sharing and each doing our part in this. Then it is clear, there is no justification to force others into those jobs. So we can only have the utmost respect for those that are fulfilling what we consider awful jobs voluntarily and happily, and for those that risk their own lifes for our protection. For those that work with poisonous stuff in an unsafe environment, spoiling their health. We could realize that a system that creates undesirable jobs and then forces people into them, is wrong, and be serious in establishing better, safer and more meaningful working opportunities.
Basic human nature is to move, to be active and contributing. Most people rather give than receive; rather help than ask for help. Trust in this principle together with respect and patience, and concern for each others health and wellbeing, brings out the best in us, and therefore logically in prosperous and compassionate societies.
Declaration of Human Rights:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Pages/Language.aspx?LangID=engareAnd