I know some places are more progressive in this regard. But from the U.S., I’d like to see every person entitled to:
- shelter
- food
- healthcare
- education and higher education
(As an aside, not sure “right” is the best term here, I think of these more as commitments that society would make because we have abundance. One advantage of the word “right” is that a person is justified in expecting it - it’s not welfare/ a benefit / a privilege)
- The right to solidarity, i.e. all should be allowed to partake in solidary action during a strike.
- The right of initiative and right to recall.
- The right to free software, or freedom from proprietary software.
- The right to a third place, i.e. ready access to physical spaces that allow for socializing with strangers.
- Freedom from eviction (mainly wrt rent strikes and squatting.)
- The right to democratic education.
- The right to cross borders.
- The right to be forgotten.
- The right to purpose, or freedom from meaningless labor. This includes the right to an employee fund.
And there are of course other things. I just think that under the world’s current paradigm, these, at least individually, seem relatively attainable without a literal revolution.
deleted by creator
Hi there! Looks like you linked to a Lemmy community using a URL instead of its name, which doesn’t work well for people on different instances. Try fixing it like this: [email protected]
This is a very helpful bot.
Digital privacy. It should be illegal to track and store data on people without their consent.
Hmm. If you were to assault me, and my friend took your picture while you’re doing it, should you be allowed to forbid my friend from publicly posting that picture?
A picture of you is certainly data about you. And you’d presumably prefer that they not publish evidence that you assaulted me. However, I think it’s in the public interest that my friend should get to publish their photo even without your consent.
That’s where the reasonable expectation of privacy provision usually comes into play. It is already illegal to go up to the window of someone’s home and take pictures of them, why then is it legal for companies like google to gather information about your activity, such as browsing habits, without asking or even notifying you. Microsoft is another really bad offender here, modern versions of Windows collect and transmit massive amounts of telemetry regarding everything from what hardware you’re using to what programs you run and how often, just as a basic part of the operating system.
I don’t understand why people always talk about Microsoft. ALL mainstream operating systems track everything you do. If anything, Microsoft were the last to join the party.
The reason is that windows is used on nearly 3/4 of all desktop computers (source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/218089/global-market-share-of-windows-7/), but that doesn’t change the question of ‘why the fuck should anoybody be allowed to do that?’ Also I would call Linux at least mainstream parallel, in that I would guess most people have at least heard of it, and it doesn’t inherently track your activity.
First of all, most people are using their mobile devices for the most time, so tracking in Android and iOS is a lot more important. Also more people have phones than desktops.
Second, Linux distros have tracking too. Ubuntu for example.
I won’t argue that tracking on mobile isn’t more important, but I will argue that it shouldn’t be allowed at all, or at least not without an informative opt in for those systems who insist on having one. And when I say informative I mean telling the user exactly what information is being gathered, why, how often, and who else can see or gets sold it.
I agree, but once again - why so much hate towards Microsoft specifically? They have less invasive tracking of all, which can easily be disabled. Unlike what you’re getting from Google and Apple.
I think you’re using the word right correctly, ultimately you’re pointing out things that you think people should have inherently and that shouldn’t be based on merits or taken from someone based on crimes. I generally agree with your list, though to add on I think that the right to transportation is fundamental to enabling most opportunities in a society and that the United States could greatly improve upon their public transit system.
I guess the tricky part is when we think of something like freedom of speech, in order to exercise the right, a person can just start talking. If we think of the right to shelter, it’s difficult for a person to just, have a place to live. It requires more active intervention by the government. And I think that intervention should happen. I only point it out because there does seem to be a distinction that could trip up the conversation. But I don’t have a better term than “right.” Anything less seems vulnerable to attack and gradual chiseling away by its opponents.
Anything less seems vulnerable to attack and gradual chiseling away by its opponents.
Almost like you’re arguing for an aggressive policy agenda that a lot of people don’t support. How about just discuss said policy instead of trying to find language that actively makes discussion more difficult?
New? How about old. Aside from the recent rights lost in the US wrt bodily autonomy/privacy (see Dobbs, etc.), what about the “Second Bill of Rights” as put forth by FDR?
No, let’s not revive the abysmal policy of that good for nothing stain on American history that was too much of a worthless sack of shit to even figure out how to do something as basic as walking
Maybe not a right but more a commitment for governments towards public transportation. Not having a car makes everything so much harder. Having as much coverage as possible within reason, more buses and drivers, expanding metro lines. Right now in my city it is just “bearable”, I am at least grateful I can do things like see buses on the map and transferring to trains is easy. Was much worse before! Not like governments wouldn’t be able to make their money back, and imagine how many less car crashes and traffic clogs we could have. Not to mention the environmental benefits.
Also electric buses are cool. So quiet and can charge in them.
Edit: To elaborate on why it should be a right: it is not like in the olden days when you could walk to the store or your job. Everything is simultaneously dense and far thanks to how zoning works and cities being car-oriented. The right to mobility exists in America, but what if we took it further and made sure you really could go where you wanted without having to invest in a car?
Public transportation should be free for everyone on top of that. We need to do everything possible to discourage driving in favour of public transport for the sake of the environment and our future selves, plus the bus driver would no longer be able to turn away poor people on hot days.
I think rather it should be free if you are poor, like food stamps. The bus fare definitely stings but I’m always happy to pay it knowing it is going to maintain the system. This is even more important in this hypothetical situation if you have tons of projects towards improving public transportation going on.
Also great username. :)
The reason I think it should be free for everyone is to incentivize choosing public transit over personal vehicles and would gladly pay more taxes to make public transportation free. You have no choice but to pay the tax, so you might as well use the system you’ve already paid to improve.
And thank you 😊
and would gladly pay more taxes to make public transportation free.
So then donate that money to the government yourself and don’t force everyone else to be stuck with your crappy taxes
Fuck that. I don’t want the government taking my money just to waste it on this garbage.
I’d just like them to fuck off and uphold life, liberty, and property.
